Cited by 135Human-Automation Interaction and SafetySocial Robot Interaction and HRIAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety

Calibrating trust through knowledge: Introducing the concept of informed safety for automation in vehicles

Khastgir, Siddartha, Birrell, Stewart, Dhadyalla, Gunwant, Jennings, Paul·2018·Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.trc.2018.07.001

Cites

64 of 64 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?

  • Most autonomous driving studies included information on automation capabilities such as conditional automation levels (e.g., Level 3 - roughly 75% automation), except for one study which included a highly automated system (Level 4).

    “In contrast, most autonomous driving studies included information on the automation capabilities such as conditional automation levels (e.g., Level 3 -roughly 75% automation), except for one study, which included a highly automated system (Level 4) [61].”
  • Khastgir et al. found that increasing knowledge about a system's capabilities and limitations increased trust in high and low capability autonomous vehicles and reduced accidents for low capability autonomous vehicles.

    “To that end, Khastgir et al. [61] found that increasing knowledge about a system's capabilities and limitations increased trust in high and low capability-autonomous vehicles and reduced the number of accidents for low capability-autonomous vehicles.”
  • Most commonly, trust calibration was measured as statistical differences of trustworthiness perceptions between high-reliability and low-reliability groups, examined through analysis of variance.

    “Most commonly, the trust calibration was measured as the statistical diferences of trustworthiness perceptions of systems with high reliability and trustworthiness perceptions of systems with low-reliability groups, examined through analysis of variance (see, e.g., [4, 15, 26, 47, 58, 61, 68-70, 82, 84, 89, 90, 107, 117, 130, 140, 145]).”
  • Performance trust calibrations inform users about specific capabilities and limitations of a system, such as confidence or general reliability, and do not inform how the system arrived at a decision.

    “Performance trust calibrations inform users about the specifc capabilities and limitations of a system, such as information about a system's confdence [90,104,145] or general information about a system's reliability [61,69].Such performance-oriented trust calibrations do not inform users how the system arrived at a decision.”
  • Informing users about the reliability of a system helped appropriately adjust trustworthiness perceptions, coined informed safety.

    “Informing users about the reliability of a system, for example, helped to appropriately adjust trustworthiness perceptions [61] which the authors coined as”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Khastgir, S., Birrell, S., Dhadyalla, G., & Jennings, P.
Affiliations
University of Warwick (GB)
Corresponding author
Khastgir, Siddartha
Venue
Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-11
Volume
96
Pages
290-303
ISSN
0968-090X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2894922550
Cited by
134
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 1
FWCI
16.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Transportation Research Part C Emerging Technologies (publishedVersion)
  • Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (acceptedVersion)
  • Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (submittedVersion)
Funders
EPSRC (EP/K011618/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Autonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Keywords
trust in automated vehicles, driver knowledge, autonomous driving, public acceptance, driver-vehicle interaction, trust calibration, driving simulator study

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