Cited by 19Usability and User Interface DesignInnovative Human-Technology InteractionTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour

Designing Trustworthy User Interfaces

Open access
Zieglmeier, Valentin, Lehene, Antonia Maria·2021·33rd Australian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction

Abstract

Interface design can directly influence trustworthiness of a software. Thereby, it affects users’ intention to use a tool. Previous research on user trust has not comprehensively addressed user interface design, though. We lack an understanding of what makes interfaces trustworthy (1), as well as actionable measures to improve trustworthiness (2).

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 · 10.1145/3520495.3520525

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Current guidelines for incorporating a transparency framework are crucial for promoting user trust and experience, focusing on data sovereignty and usability improvements to optimize VRET app design.

    “The current guidelines for incorporating a transparency framework are crucial for promoting user trust and experience. They focused on data sovereignty and usability improvements to optimize the VRET app design [73,74], as shown in Table 3.”

    From SAFEvR MentalVeRse.app: Development of a Free Immersive Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy for Acrophobia and Claustrophobia (2024) · cites this paper as [73]

    The paper describes transparency as a factor in trustworthiness (Process dimension, p. 3) and recommends transparency and usability measures to elicit user trust (Designing User Interfaces to Elicit Trust, pp. 3–4). It does not address data sovereignty or VRET app design, or present its recommendations as a transparency framework for that setting. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. [4][4] Julio Angulo, Simone Fischer-Hübner, Tobias Pulls, and Erik Wästlund. 2015. Usable transparency with the Data Track: a tool for visualizing data disclosures. In Proceedings of the 33 rd ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, 1803-1808. -
  2. [28][28] Bronwyn French, Andreas Duenser, and Andrew Heathcote. 2018. Trust in automation - a literature review . Technical Report EP184082. CSIRO. -
  3. [36][36] Jan Hartmann, Antonella De Angeli, and Alistair Sutcliffe. 2008. Framing the User Experience: Information Biases on Website Quality Judgement. In Proceedings of the 2008 SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, 855-864. -
  4. [40][40] Milena M. Head and Khaled Hassanein. 2002. Trust in e-Commerce: Evaluating the Impact of Third-Party Seals. Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce 3, 3 (2002), 307-325. -
  5. [39][39] Marc Hassenzahl and Noam Tractinsky. 2006. User experience - a research agenda. Behaviour & Information Technology 25, 2 (2006), 91-97. -
  6. [57][57] Maria Madsen and Shirley Gregor. 2000. Measuring human-computer trust. In Proceedings of the 11 th Australasian Conference on Information Systems . 6-8. -
  7. [62][62] Alexander G. Mirnig, Sandra Troesterer, Elke Beck, and Manfred Tscheligi. 2014. To trust or not to trust. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering . 164-181. -
  8. [67][67] Raja Parasuraman and Christopher A. Miller. 2004. Trust and Etiquette in HighCriticality Automated Systems. Commun. ACM 47, 4 (2004), 51-55. -
  9. [91][91] Beste F. Yuksel, Penny Collisson, and Mary Czerwinski. 2016. Brains or Beauty: How to Engender Trust in User-Agent Interactions. ACMTransactions on Internet Technology 17, 2 (2016). -

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zieglmeier, V., & Lehene, A. M.
Affiliations
Technical University of Munich (DE)
Venue
33rd Australian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction
Publisher
ACM
Published
2021-11-30
Pages
182-189
OpenAlex
W4220681008
Cited by
19
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2
FWCI
0.75
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Australian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (OzCHI) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (acceptedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (5091121)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
Keywords
user trust, user interface design, trustworthiness, intention to use

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