The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Trust in AI: progress, challenges, and future directions
Open accessAbstract
The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems in our daily lives through various applications, services, and products highlights the significance of trust and distrust in AI from a user perspective. AI-driven systems have significantly diffused into various aspects of our lives, serving as beneficial “tools” used by human agents. These systems are also evolving to act as co-assistants or semi-agents in specific domains, potentially influencing human thought, decision-making, and agency. Trust and distrust in AI serve as regulators and could significantly control the level of this diffusion, as trust can increase, and distrust may reduce the rate of adoption of AI. Recently, a variety of studies focused on the different dimensions of trust and distrust in AI and its relevant considerations. In this systematic literature review, after conceptualizing trust in the current AI literature, we will investigate trust in different types of human–machine interaction and its impact on technology acceptance in different domains. Additionally, we propose a taxonomy of technical (i.e., safety, accuracy, robustness) and non-technical axiological (i.e., ethical, legal, and mixed) trustworthiness metrics, along with some trustworthy measurements. Moreover, we examine major trust-breakers in AI (e.g., autonomy and dignity threats) and trustmakers; and propose some future directions and probable solutions for the transition to a trustworthy AI.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search
Silver, D., Huang, A., Maddison, C. J., Guez, A., Sifre, L., van den Driessche, G., Schrittwieser, J., Antonoglou, I., Panneershelvam, V., Lanctot, M., et al. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature16961 · Cited by 15,612
Rudin, C. (2019) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-019-0048-x · Cited by 10,561
Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance
Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/hfes.46.1.50_30392 · Cited by 6,605
The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines
Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2 · Cited by 6,220 · cited 2×
“Although transparency and explainability have been usually categorized under the same ethical principle (Jobin et al., 2019a), it is essential to distinguish between these two different topics before extensive interchangeable misuse of them.”
Lipton, Z. C. (2018) · Queue · doi:10.1145/3236386.3241340 · Cited by 5,427
Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)
Tabassi, E. (2023) · doi:10.6028/nist.ai.100-1 · Cited by 2,951
Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learning
Gilpin, L. H., Bau, D., Yuan, B. Z., Bajwa, A., Specter, M., & Kagal, L. (2018) · 2018 IEEE 5th International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA) · doi:10.1109/dsaa.2018.00018 · Cited by 2,507
The Ethics of AI Ethics: An Evaluation of Guidelines
Hagendorff, T. (2020) · Minds and Machines · doi:10.1007/s11023-020-09517-8 · Cited by 1,911 · cited 1×
“For a comprehensive review of AI ethics guidelines, the practical implementation of AI and ethics, and advancements in AI ethics, interested readers are referred to (Hagendorff, 2020).”
The Ethics of AI Ethics -- An Evaluation of Guidelines
Hagendorff, T. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1903.03425 · Cited by 1,907 · cited 1×
“For a comprehensive review of AI ethics guidelines, the practical implementation of AI and ethics, and advancements in AI ethics, interested readers are referred to (Hagendorff, 2020).”
Information Privacy Concerns, Procedural Fairness, and Impersonal Trust: An Empirical Investigation
Culnan, M. J., & Armstrong, P. K. (1999) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.10.1.104 · Cited by 1,870
Machine Learning Interpretability: A Survey on Methods and Metrics
Carvalho, D. V., Pereira, E. M., & Cardoso, J. S. (2019) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics8080832 · Cited by 1,842
AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user compliance
Adam, M., Wessel, M., & Benlian, A. (2021) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-020-00414-7 · Cited by 1,195 · cited 1×
“Electronic markets, for example, are increasingly augmented with AI-based systems such as customer service chatbots (Adam et al., 2021b).”
Nagendran, M., Chen, Y., Lovejoy, C. A., Gordon, A. C., Komorowski, M., Harvey, H., Topol, E. J., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Collins, G. S., & Maruthappu, M. (2020) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.m689 · Cited by 1,152
Buçinca, Z., Malaya, M. B., & Gajos, K. Z. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2102.09692 · Cited by 1,124 · cited 4×
“People often over-rely on arti fi cial intelligence systems, trusting them too much (Buçinca et al., 2021).”
InfluentialIn AI we trust? Perceptions about automated decision-making by artificial intelligence
Araujo, T., Helberger, N., Kruikemeier, S., & de Vreese, C. H. (2020) · AI & SOCIETY · doi:10.1007/s00146-019-00931-w · Cited by 1,038
Artificial Intelligence, Values, and Alignment
Gabriel, I. (2020) · Minds and Machines · doi:10.1007/s11023-020-09539-2 · Cited by 896 · cited 7×
“…others worry about the so-called “ alignment problem ” of how we, as a society, and researchers working on arti fi cial intelligence research could ensure that an AGI ’ s interests and values would align with our own (Abbass, 2019c; Bostrom, 2014; Gabriel, 2020; Prasad, 2019; Taylor et al., 2016).”
InfluentialZhang, Y., Liao, Q. V., & Bellamy, R. K. E. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3351095.3372852 · Cited by 895
In AI We Trust: Ethics, Artificial Intelligence, and Reliability
Ryan, M. (2020) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/s11948-020-00228-y · Cited by 600
Interpretability of machine learning-based prediction models in healthcare
Stiglic, G., Kocbek, P., Fijacko, N., Zitnik, M., Verbert, K., & Cilar, L. (2020) · WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1002/widm.1379 · Cited by 541 · cited 1×
“Intrinsic interpretability refers to techniques that are intrinsically inter-pretable due to their structure (Ai and Narayanan, 2021; Pintelas et al., 2020; Stiglic et al., 2020).”
Accountability of AI Under the Law: The Role of Explanation
Doshi-Velez, F., Kortz, M., Budish, R., Bavitz, C., Gershman, S. J., O'Brien, D., Scott, K., Shieber, S., Waldo, J., Weinberger, D., et al. (2017) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3064761 · Cited by 457
Algorithmic Accountability and Public Reason
Binns, R. (2018) · Philosophy & Technology · doi:10.1007/s13347-017-0263-5 · Cited by 457 · cited 1×
“Within this project, the so-called “ right to explanation ” has been central (Ahn et al., 2021; Alam and Mueller, 2021; Ausloos et al., 2020; Binns, 2018; Bovens et al., 2014; Buçinca et al., 2021; Doshi-Velez et al., 2016; Feldman et al., 2019; Smith-Renner et al., 2020; Sperrle et al., 2020;…”
FactSheets: Increasing trust in AI services through supplier's declarations of conformity
Arnold, M., Bellamy, R. K. E., Hind, M., Houde, S., Mehta, S., Mojsilović, A., Nair, R., Ramamurthy, K. N., Olteanu, A., Piorkowski, D., et al. (2019) · IBM Journal of Research and Development · doi:10.1147/jrd.2019.2942288 · Cited by 434
Physician Confidence in Artificial Intelligence: An Online Mobile Survey
Oh, S., Kim, J. H., Choi, S.-W., Lee, H. J., Hong, J., & Kwon, S. H. (2019) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/12422 · Cited by 387
Robinson, S. C. (2020) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101421 · Cited by 338
CRISPR Ethics: Moral Considerations for Applications of a Powerful Tool
Brokowski, C., & Adli, M. (2019) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2018.05.044 · Cited by 320
In principle obstacles for empathic AI: why we can’t replace human empathy in healthcare
Montemayor, C., Halpern, J., & Fairweather, A. (2022) · AI & SOCIETY · doi:10.1007/s00146-021-01230-z · Cited by 293
Adaptive trust calibration for human-AI collaboration
Okamura, K., & Yamada, S. (2020) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0229132 · Cited by 239
Artificial intelligence and the ongoing need for empathy, compassion and trust in healthcare
Kerasidou, A. (2020) · Bulletin of the World Health Organization · doi:10.2471/blt.19.237198 · Cited by 232
Do We Trust in AI? Role of Anthropomorphism and Intelligence
Troshani, I., Rao Hill, S., Sherman, C., & Arthur, D. (2021) · Journal of Computer Information Systems · doi:10.1080/08874417.2020.1788473 · Cited by 228
Abbass, H. A. (2019) · Cognitive Computation · doi:10.1007/s12559-018-9619-0 · Cited by 200
Rapid Trust Calibration through Interpretable and Uncertainty-Aware AI
Tomsett, R., Preece, A., Braines, D., Cerutti, F., Chakraborty, S., Srivastava, M., Pearson, G., & Kaplan, L. (2020) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2020.100049 · Cited by 186 · cited 1×
“In order to address this, Tomsett et al. (2020) explain the concept of trust calibration, which involves making AI systems interpretable and uncertainty-aware.”
What we talk about when we talk about trust: Theory of trust for AI in healthcare
Gille, F., Jobin, A., & Ienca, M. (2020) · Intelligence-Based Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.ibmed.2020.100001 · Cited by 159
Explanation and trust: what to tell the user in security and AI?
Pieters, W. (2011) · Ethics and Information Technology · doi:10.1007/s10676-010-9253-3 · Cited by 153
Lee, M. K., & Rich, K. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445570 · Cited by 145
In AI we trust? Citizen perceptions of AI in government decision making
Ingrams, A., Kaufmann, W., & Jacobs, D. (2022) · Policy & Internet · doi:10.1002/poi3.276 · Cited by 133
Smith-Renner, A., Fan, R., Birchfield, M., Wu, T., Boyd-Graber, J., Weld, D. S., & Findlater, L. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376624 · Cited by 112
Yoon, N., & Lee, H.-K. (2021) · Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research · doi:10.3390/jtaer16050107 · Cited by 104
A Survey of Artificial General Intelligence Projects for Ethics, Risk, and Policy
Baum, S. D. (2017) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3070741 · Cited by 93
Zarifis, A., Kawalek, P., & Azadegan, A. (2021) · Journal of Internet Commerce · doi:10.1080/15332861.2020.1832817 · Cited by 89
The Sanction of Authority: Promoting Public Trust in AI
Knowles, B., & Richards, J. T. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3442188.3445890 · Cited by 86
Can we trust AI not to further embed racial bias and prejudice?
Noor, P. (2020) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.m363 · Cited by 71 · cited 1×
“For instance, in AI-based medical diagnostic systems, discriminations and biases might arise when little or no information from black-skinned and other minorities is fed into the system during its development (Noor, 2020).”
In AI We Trust: Investigating the Relationship between Biosignals, Trust and Cognitive Load in VR
Gupta, K., Hajika, R., Pai, Y. S., Duenser, A., Lochner, M., & Billinghurst, M. (2019) · 25th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology · doi:10.1145/3359996.3364276 · Cited by 59 · cited 1×
“Another study aims to evaluate human trust in AI by examining the relationship between psycho-physiological states, such as biosignals or physiological signals, and trust and cognitive load (Gupta et al., 2019).”
University of St.Gallen, I. O. I. M., Zierau, N., Engel, C., Söllner, M., University of Kassel, I. S. A. S. E., Leimeister, J. M., & University of Kassel, I. S. (2020) · WI2020 Zentrale Tracks · doi:10.30844/wi_2020_a7-zierau · Cited by 17 · cited 2×
“…2021; Hui et al., 2021; Jacobs et al., 2021; D. K. D. Kim and Kim, 2021a), fi nance (Chandra et al., 2010; Kumar et al., 2021; Zierau et al., 2021), personal assistance (Fan et al., 2021b; Pitardi and Marriott, 2021a; Zierau et al., 2020), autonomous vehicles (Ajenaghughrure et al., 2020a), etc.”
Cited by
AI agents and agentic systems: a multi-expert analysis
Hughes, L., Dwivedi, Y. K., Malik, T., Shawosh, M., Albashrawi, M. A., Jeon, I., Dutot, V., Appanderanda, M., Crick, T., De’, R., et al. (2025) · Journal of Computer Information Systems · doi:10.1080/08874417.2025.2483832 · Cited by 168
Towards Trustworthy AI: A Review of Ethical and Robust Large Language Models
Ferdaus, M. M., Abdelguerfi, M., Ioup, E., Niles, K. N., Pathak, K., & Sloan, S. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.13934 · Cited by 80
ADABARA, I., Olaniyi Sadiq, B., Nuhu Shuaibu, A., Ibrahim Danjuma, Y., & Maninti, V. (2025) · F1000Research · doi:10.12688/f1000research.169927.1 · Cited by 38
Trusting AI: does uncertainty visualization affect decision-making?
Reyes, J., Batmaz, A. U., & Kersten-Oertel, M. (2025) · Frontiers in Computer Science · doi:10.3389/fcomp.2025.1464348 · Cited by 27
Editorial: Framing the Future with a Research Agenda for Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education
Fitzgerald, R., Amantha Kumar, J., Roe, J., Roehrer, E., & Yang, J. (2025) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/jwt7ra63 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Afroogh, S., Akbari, A., Malone, E., Kargar, M., & Alambeigi, H.
- Venue
- Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
- Published
- 2024-11-18
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2055-1045 (ISSN-L)
- 2662-9992
- OpenAlex
- W4404470920
- Cited by
- 507
- References
- 43
- FWCI
- 209.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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.
