Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 269

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

To trust or not to trust? An assessment of trust in AI-based systems: Concerns, ethics and contexts

Omrani, Nessrine, Rivieccio, Giorgia, Fiore, Ugo, Schiavone, Francesco, Agreda, Sergio Garcia·2022·Technological Forecasting and Social Change
DOI 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121763
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121763

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 22 references

Research works printed but not linked: 51

  1. Andrews, 2012, System personality and persuasion in human-computer dialogue, ACM Trans. Interact. Intell. Syst., 2, 1, 10.1145/2209310.2209315 · DOI
  2. Arias-Pérez, 2022, Ignoring the three-way interaction of digital orientation, not-invented-here syndrome and employee's artificial intelligence awareness in digital innovation performance: a recipe for failure, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang., 174, 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121305 · DOI
  3. Atabekov, 2018, Legal status of artificial intelligence across countries: legislation on the move, Eur. Res. Stud. J., 21, 773, 10.35808/ersj/1245 · DOI
  4. Baudier, 2021, Patients’ perceptions of teleconsultation during COVID-19: a cross-national study, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang., 163, 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120510 · DOI
  5. Becerra, 2018, The rise of artificial intelligence in the legal field: where we are and where we are going, J. Bus. Entrep., 11
  6. Brendel, 2021, Ethical management of artificial intelligence, Sustainability, 13
  7. Brock, 1965, Communicator-recipient similarity and decision change, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 1, 650, 10.1037/h0022081 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Caliskan, 2017, Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases, Science, 356, 183, 10.1126/science.aal4230 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Carbonneau, 2008, Application of machine learning techniques for supply chain demand forecasting, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 184, 1140, 10.1016/j.ejor.2006.12.004 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Carradore, 2021, People’s attitudes towards the use of robots in the social services: a multilevel analysis using eurobarometer data, Int. J. Soc. Robot., 1 14
  11. Carvalho, 2019, A systematic literature review of machine learning methods applied to predictive maintenance, Comput. Ind. Eng., 137
  12. Castellano, 2019, Do digital and communication technologies improve smart ports? A fuzzy DEA approach, IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf., 15, 5674, 10.1109/TII.2019.2927749 · DOI
  13. Chattaraman, 2014, Virtual shopping agents: persona effects for older users, J. Res. Interact. Mark.
  14. Cheng, 2020, There is hope after all: quantifying opinion and trustworthiness in neural networks, Front. Artif. Intell., 3
  15. Chi, 2021, Developing a formative scale to measure consumers’ trust toward interaction with artificially intelligent (AI) social robots in service delivery, Comput. Hum. Behav., 118, 10.1016/j.chb.2021.106700 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Chiesa, 2011, Commercializing technological innovation: learning from failures in high-tech markets, J. Prod. Innov. Manag., 28, 437, 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00818.x · DOI
  17. Cho, 2009, The effect of service quality on trust and commitment varying across generations, Int. J. Consum. Stud., 33, 468, 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00777.x · DOI
  18. Chui, 2019, Big data and IoT solution for patient behaviour monitoring, Behav. Inform. Technol., 38, 940, 10.1080/0144929X.2019.1584245 · DOI
  19. Datta, 2015, Automated experiments on ad privacy settings, Proc. Priv. Enhancing Technol., 2015, 92, 10.1515/popets-2015-0007 · DOI · Paper page
  20. de Melo, 2018, Social decisions and fairness change when people’s interests are represented by autonomous agents, Auton. Agent. Multi-Agent Syst., 32, 163, 10.1007/s10458-017-9376-6 · DOI
  21. Duarte, 2012, Trust and credit: the role of appearance in peer-topeer lending, Rev. Financ. Stud., 25, 2455, 10.1093/rfs/hhs071 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Fiore, 2021, Digitization, epistemic proximity, and the education system: insights from a bibliometric analysis, J. Risk Financ. Manag., 14, 267, 10.3390/jrfm14060267 · DOI
  23. Ghazizadeh, 2012, Extending the technology acceptance model to assess automation, Cogn. Tech. Work, 14, 39, 10.1007/s10111-011-0194-3 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Groom, 2007, Can robots be teammates?: Benchmarks in human–robot teams, Interact. Stud., 8, 483 500, 10.1075/is.8.3.10gro · DOI
  25. Gupta, 2021, Artificial intelligence for decision support systems in the field of operations research: review and future scope of research, Ann. Oper. Res., 1 60
  26. Hancock, 2011, Can you trust your robot?, Ergon. Des., 19, 24
  27. Hengstler, 2016, Applied artificial intelligence and trust—the case of autonomous vehicles and medical assistance devices, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang., 105, 105 120, 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.12.014 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Hooks, 2022, Exploring factors influencing technology adoption rate at the macro level: a predictive model, Technol. Soc., 68, 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101826 · DOI
  29. Hudson, 2017, People’s attitudes to robots in caring for the elderly, Int. J. Soc. Robot., 9, 199, 10.1007/s12369-016-0384-5 · DOI
  30. Khalilpourazari, 2020, Designing an efficient blood supply chain network in crisis: neural learning, optimization and case study, Ann. Oper. Res., 289, 123, 10.1007/s10479-019-03437-2 · DOI
  31. Khan, 2014, Attractive agents are more persuasive, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact., 30, 142, 10.1080/10447318.2013.839904 · DOI
  32. Kwilinski, 2020, Digitalization of the EU economies and people at risk of poverty or social exclusion, J. Risk Financ. Manag., 13, 142, 10.3390/jrfm13070142 · DOI
  33. Lee, 1994, Trust, self-confidence and operators’ adaptation to automation, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud., 40, 153
  34. Leone, 2021, How does artificial intelligence enable and enhance value co-creation in industrial markets? An exploratory case study in the healthcare ecosystem, J. Bus. Res., 129, 849 859, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.008 · DOI · Paper page
  35. Madhavan, 2007, Similarities and differences between human–human and human–automation trust: an integrative review, Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci., 8, 277, 10.1080/14639220500337708 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Mou, 2017, The media inequality: comparing the initial human-human and human-AI social interactions, Comput. Hum. Behav., 72, 432, 10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.067 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Mumm, 2011, Designing motivational agents: the role of praise, social comparison, and embodiment in computer feedback, Comput. Hum. Behav., 27, 1643, 10.1016/j.chb.2011.02.002 · DOI
  38. Piazza, 2019, Which appraisals are foundational to moral judgment? Harm, injustice, and beyond, Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci., 10, 903, 10.1177/1948550618801326 · DOI
  39. Ram, 1989, Consumer resistance to innovations: the marketing problem and its solutions, J. Consum. Mark., 6, 5 14, 10.1108/EUM0000000002542 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Rossi, 2018, Building trust in artificial intelligence, J. Int. Aff., 72, 127
  41. Saif, 2020, ’Trustworthy AI’is a framework to help manage unique risk, MIT Technol. Rev.
  42. Schoorman, 2007, An integrative model of organizational trust: past, present and future, Acad. Manag. Rev., 32, 344, 10.5465/amr.2007.24348410 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Shareef, 2021, A new health care system enabled by machine intelligence: elderly people's trust or losing self control, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang., 162, 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120334 · DOI
  44. Sternthal, 1978, The persuasive effect of source credibility: tests of cognitive response, J. Consum. Res., 4, 252 260, 10.1086/208704 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Sullivan, 2022, Appraisals of harms and injustice trigger an eerie feeling that decreases trust in artificial intelligence systems, Ann. Oper. Res., 308, 525 548, 10.1007/s10479-020-03702-9 · DOI
  46. Vu, 2021, Effects of country and individual factors on public acceptance of artificial intelligence and robotics technologies: a multilevel SEM analysis of 28-country survey data, Behav. Inform. Technol., 1
  47. Wallach, 2018, Computational social science≠ computer science+ social data, Commun. ACM, 61, 42, 10.1145/3132698 · DOI
  48. Wang, 2019, Artificial intelligence, machine learning, automation, robotics, future of work and future of humanity: a review and research agenda, J. Database Manag., 30, 61, 10.4018/JDM.2019010104 · DOI · Paper page
  49. Wang, 2016, Effects of rational and social appeals of online recommendation agents on cognition- and affect-based trust, Decis. Support. Syst., 86, 48, 10.1016/j.dss.2016.03.007 · DOI
  50. Winfield, 2018, Ethical governance is essential to building trust in robotics and artificial intelligence systems, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A, 376, 10.1098/rsta.2018.0085 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Zhang, 2005, The intellectual development of human-computer interaction research: a critical assessment of the MIS literature (1990-2002), J. Assoc. Inf. Syst.

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Omrani, N., Rivieccio, G., Fiore, U., Schiavone, F., & Agreda, S. G.
Venue
Technological Forecasting and Social Change
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-08
Volume
181
Pages
121763
ISSN
0040-1625 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121763
OpenAlex
W4281919074
Cited by
269
References
22
FWCI
49.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.