Cited by 350E-Government and Public ServicesAI in Service InteractionsSocial Robot Interaction and HRI

An experimental study of public trust in AI chatbots in the public sector

Aoki, Naomi·2020·Government Information Quarterly

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.giq.2020.101490

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aoki, N.
Affiliations
The University of Tokyo (JP)
Corresponding author
Aoki, Naomi
Venue
Government Information Quarterly
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-10
Volume
37
Issue
4
Pages
101490
ISSN
0740-624X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3064053140
Cited by
350
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 72 · 2025: 84 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 1
FWCI
101.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Government Information Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Funders
National University of Singapore
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › E-Government and Public Services
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
Keywords
public trust in AI, AI chatbots, public sector, trust in machines, parental support, waste sorting, government communication

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review