The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
“To trust or not to trust: how a conversational interface affects trust in a decision support system,”
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“Through conversational interfaces, users had to provide some constraints given in the decision making problem for the AI to propose a candidate solution (Khadpe et al., 2020;Jiang et al., 2022;Gupta et al., 2022).”
From Human-AI collaboration is not very collaborative yet: a taxonomy of interaction patterns in AI-assisted decision making from a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as Gupta et al., 2022
In the citing paper
“While this pattern has been commonly observed in humans interacting with conversational agents (Jiang et al., 2022;Gupta et al., 2022), it is not only limited to traditional conversational interfaces (Gomez et al., 2023).”
From Human-AI collaboration is not very collaborative yet: a taxonomy of interaction patterns in AI-assisted decision making from a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as Gupta et al., 2022
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
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
Trust in Automation: Integrating Empirical Evidence on Factors That Influence Trust
Hoff, K. A., & Bashir, M. (2015) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720814547570 · Cited by 2,817
Rahwan, I., Cebrian, M., Obradovich, N., Bongard, J., Bonnefon, J.-F., Breazeal, C., Crandall, J. W., Christakis, N. A., Couzin, I. D., Jackson, M. O., et al. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1138-y · Cited by 1,364 · cited 1×
“Assistive technologies like decision support systems help humans in making decisions and provide the best course of action, particularly when dealing with large amounts of data and complex variables [13, 38, 43].”
BackgroundOn-line trust: concepts, evolving themes, a model
Corritore, C. L., Kracher, B., & Wiedenbeck, S. (2003) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/s1071-5819(03)00041-7 · Cited by 1,200
Franke, T., Attig, C., & Wessel, D. (2019) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2018.1456150 · Cited by 828
Nass, C., & Lee, K. M. (2001) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied · doi:10.1037/1076-898x.7.3.171 · Cited by 522
Lee, S., & Choi, J. (2017) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.02.005 · Cited by 388
How to Evaluate Trust in AI-Assisted Decision Making? A Survey of Empirical Methodologies
Vereschak, O., Bailly, G., & Caramiaux, B. (2021) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3476068 · Cited by 229
Taxonomy of Trust-Relevant Failures and Mitigation Strategies
Tolmeijer, S., Weiss, A., Hanheide, M., Lindner, F., Powers, T. M., Dixon, C., & Tielman, M. L. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction · doi:10.1145/3319502.3374793 · Cited by 103
Second Chance for a First Impression? Trust Development in Intelligent System Interaction
Tolmeijer, S., Gadiraju, U., Ghantasala, R., Gupta, A., & Bernstein, A. (2021) · Proceedings of the 29th ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization · doi:10.1145/3450613.3456817 · Cited by 67
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 37
- 10.1609/hcomp.v9i1.18935 · DOI
- 10.3390/s20020569 · DOI
- 10.1609/hcomp.v8i1.7458 · DOI
- Christiane Attig Daniel Wessel and Thomas Franke. 2017. Assessing Personality Differences in Human-Technology Interaction: An Overview of Key Self-report Scales to Predict Successful Interaction. 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58750-9_3 · DOI
- Alessandro Bozzon, Marco Brambilla, Stefano Ceri, and Andrea Mauri. 2013. Reactive Crowdsourcing. In Proceedings of the 22Nd International Conference on World Wide Web (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) (WWW ’13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 153–164.
- 10.1145/3148148 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s10619-014-7162-x · doi:10.1007/s10619-014-7162-x
- TU Delta. 2020. Room Shortage in Delft. Retrieved October 31, 2021 from https://www.delta.tudelft.nl/article/room-shortage-delft-will-continue-increase.
- 10.1145/3491102.3517734 · DOI
- 10.1609/hcomp.v8i1.7462 · DOI
- Go-Gulf. 2018. The Rise of Virtual Digital Assistants Usage – Statistics and Trends. Retrieved June 12, 2020 from https://www.go-gulf.com/virtual-digital-assistants/.
- 10.1109/TKDE.2019.2948168 · DOI
- 10.1109/MIC.2018.2881519 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/3313831.3376320 · DOI
- 10.14236/ewic · DOI
- 10.1145/3173574.3173869 · DOI
- J L Johns. 1996. A concept analysis of trust.Journal of advanced nursing 24 1 (1996), 76–83.
- 10.1145/3491102.3517653 · DOI · Paper page
- Pavel Kucherbaev Azad Abad Stefano Tranquillini Florian Daniel Maurizio Marchese and Fabio Casati. 2016. CrowdCafe-Mobile Crowdsourcing Platform. arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.01752(2016). · arXiv
- 10.4108/icst.mobiquitous.2014.258030 · doi:10.4108/icst.mobiquitous.2014.258030
- 10.1518/hfes.46.1.50.30392 · doi:10.1518/hfes.46.1.50.30392 · Paper page
- Technology Magazine. 2018. Gartner Says 25 Percent of Customer Service Operations Will Use Virtual Customer Assistants by 2020. https://www.technologymagazine.com/ai/gartner-virtual-assistants-feature-25-customer-services-2020
- 10.1145/3320435.3320439 · DOI
- 10.2307/258792 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/2858036.2858539 · DOI
- Christopher A Miller. 2002. Definitions and dimensions of etiquette. In Proc. AAAI Fall Symposium on Etiquette and Human-Computer Work.
- 10.1145/3392837 · DOI
- Sihang Qiu, Ujwal Gadiraju, and Alessandro Bozzon. 2020. Improving Worker Engagement Through Conversational Microtask Crowdsourcing. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3313831.3376403 · DOI
- 10.1145/3406865.3418572 · DOI
- 10.1145/3409256.3409830 · DOI
- Li Chen Rong Hu and Pearl Pu. 2010. ResQue. Retrieved June 11, 2020 from https://hci.epfl.ch/research-projects/resque/.
- 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1967.tb01454.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3390/mti2040062 · DOI
- 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(200001 · doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0771(200001
- 10.1145/3308532.3329441 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1109/ICASI.2018.8394571 · DOI
- 10.2196/ijmr.2402 · DOI
Cited by
Gomez, C., Cho, S. M., Ke, S., Huang, C.-M., & Unberath, M. (2025) · Frontiers in Computer Science · doi:10.3389/fcomp.2024.1521066 · Cited by 209
Wischnewski, M., Krämer, N., & Müller, E. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581197 · Cited by 146
“[71, 109, 110, 132, 141] and eight which specifcally referred to artifcial intelligence [11, 12, 43, 83, 100, 118, 144, 145].”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Gupta, A., Basu, D., Ghantasala, R., Qiu, S., & Gadiraju, U.
- Affiliations
- Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
- Venue
- Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2022-04-25
- Pages
- 3531-3540
- Cited by
- 57
- References
- 10
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: “To trust or not to trust: how a conversational interface affects trust in a decision support system,”. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/3485447.3512248
- The paper
- Gupta, A., Basu, D., Ghantasala, R., Qiu, S., & Gadiraju, U. (2022). “To trust or not to trust: how a conversational interface affects trust in a decision support system,”. Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022. https://doi.org/10.1145/3485447.3512248
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.
