Applied artificial intelligence and trust—The case of autonomous vehicles and medical assistance devices

Automation with inherent artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly emerging in diverse applications, for instance, autonomous vehicles and medical assistance devices. However, despite their growing use, there is still noticeable skepticism in society regarding these applications. Drawing an analogy from human social interaction, the concept of trust provides a valid foundation for describing the relationship between humans and automation. Accordingly, this paper explores how firms systematically foster trust regarding applied AI. Based on empirical analysis using nine case studies in the transportation and medical technology industries, our study illustrates the dichotomous constitution of trust in applied AI. Concretely, we emphasize the symbiosis of trust in the technology as well as in the innovating firm and its communication about the technology. In doing so, we provide tangible approaches to increase trust in the technology and illustrate the necessity of a democratic development process for applied AI.

[1]  L. G. Tornatzky,et al.  Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption-implementation: A meta-analysis of findings , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[2]  Sylwia Męcfal.  Recenzja książki. Robert K. yin, Case Study Research. Design and Methods (fourth Edition), thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2009 , 2012 .

[3]  Yikuan Lee,et al.  New product launch strategy for network effects products , 2003 .

[4]  N Moray,et al.  Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. , 1992, Ergonomics.

[5]  P. Slovic.  Perception of risk. , 1987, Science.

[6]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies , 2000, Management Science.

[7]  Ryan Calo,et al.  Legal Aspects of Autonomous Driving , 2010 .

[8]  S Najarian,et al.  Advances in medical robotic systems with specific applications in surgery—a review , 2011, Journal of medical engineering & technology.

[9]  Fan-Yun Pai,et al.  Applying the Technology Acceptance Model to the introduction of healthcare information systems , 2011 .

[10]  S. Hart,et al.  The impact of new product launch strategies on competitive reaction in industrial markets , 2002 .

[11]  N. Selwyn.  Apart from technology: understanding people’s non-use of information and communication technologies in everyday life , 2003 .

[12]  Martin Hägele,et al.  Robotic home assistant Care-O-bot® 3 - product vision and innovation platform , 2009, 2009 IEEE Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts.

[13]  John D. Lee,et al.  Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance , 2004 .

[14]  Erik Brynjolfsson,et al.  The second machine age: work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies, 1st Edition , 2014 .

[15]  Pin Luarn,et al.  AIS Electronic Library (AISeL) , 2017 .

[16]  Shoshana Zuboff,et al.  In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power , 1989 .

[17]  R. Cooper.  Perspective third-generation new product processes , 1994 .

[18]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits , 1978 .

[19]  M. Rouse,et al.  Rethinking research methods for the resource‐based perspective: isolating sources of sustainable competitive advantage , 1999 .

[20]  S. Ram,et al.  Consumer Resistance to Innovations: The Marketing Problem and its solutions , 1989 .

[21]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework , 1988 .

[22]  T. Brock,et al.  COMMUNICATOR-RECIPIENT SIMILARITY AND DECISION CHANGE. , 1965, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[23]  F. Schiavone,et al.  Limits to the diffusion of innovation: A literature review and integrative model , 2010 .

[24]  Rino Falcone,et al.  Trust and control: A dialectic link , 2000, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[25]  E. Rogers.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[26]  Linda Ng Boyle,et al.  Extending the Technology Acceptance Model to assess automation , 2011, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[27]  Peter Norvig,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , 1995 .

[28]  K. Eisenhardt.  Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[29]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research : techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory , 1998 .

[30]  Sergio Toral,et al.  The moderating role of prior experience in technological acceptance models for ubiquitous computing services in urban environments , 2015 .

[31]  Nick Lee,et al.  An exploration of consumer resistance to innovation and its antecedents , 2009 .

[32]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[33]  Bonnie M. Muir,et al.  Trust Between Humans and Machines, and the Design of Decision Aids , 1987, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[34]  Clark Leavitt,et al.  The Persuasive Effect of Source Credibility: Tests of Cognitive Response , 1978 .

[35]  Florian Mezger,et al.  Toward a Capability‐Based Conceptualization of Business Model Innovation: Insights from an Explorative Study , 2014 .

[36]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Behavioural changes in drivers experiencing highly-automated vehicle control in varying traffic conditions , 2013 .

[37]  M. Douglas,et al.  Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers , 1983 .

[38]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[39]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[40]  Barbara Wejnert.  Integrating models of diffusion of innovations: a Conceptual Framework. , 2002 .

[41]  J. G. Holmes,et al.  Trust in close relationships. , 1985 .

[42]  G. Schewe,et al.  ENHANCING TRUST OR REDUCING PERCEIVED RISK, WHAT MATTERS MORE WHEN LAUNCHING A NEW PRODUCT? , 2014 .

[43]  Lynn J. Frewer,et al.  Understanding public attitudes to technology , 1998 .

[44]  Matthew B. Miles,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook , 1994 .

[45]  T. Jick.  Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action. , 1979 .

[46]  Vittorio Chiesa,et al.  Commercializing Technological Innovation: Learning from Failures in High-Tech Markets* , 2011 .

[47]  M. Gibbert,et al.  What passes as a rigorous case study , 2008 .

[48]  R. Cooper.  Third‐Generation New Product Processes , 1994 .

[49]  Daniel L. Sherrell,et al.  Source effects in communication and persuasion research: A meta-analysis of effect size , 1993 .

[50]  Richard Shepherd,et al.  Public Concerns in the United Kingdom about General and Specific Applications of Genetic Engineering: Risk, Benefit, and Ethics , 1997, Science, technology & human values.

[51]  S. Ram.  Successful innovation using strategies to reduce consumer resistance: An empirical test , 1989 .

[52]  Elena Karahanna,et al.  Reconceptualizing Compatability Beliefs in Technology Acceptance Research , 2006, MIS Q..

[53]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An Integrative Model Of Organizational Trust , 1995 .

[54]  Charles J. Kacmar,et al.  The impact of initial consumer trust on intentions to transact with a web site: a trust building model , 2002, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[55]  Jakki J. Mohr,et al.  Successful Development and Commercialization of Technological Innovation: Insights Based on Strategy Type , 2006 .

[56]  Patrick Spieth,et al.  WHY INNOVATIONS FAIL — THE CASE OF PASSIVE AND ACTIVE INNOVATION RESISTANCE , 2013 .

[57]  Paul Slovic,et al.  Perceived risk, trust, and democracy , 1993 .

[58]  G. Huber,et al.  Retrospective reports of strategic‐level managers: Guidelines for increasing their accuracy , 1985 .

[59]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  Consumer Acceptance of Electronic Commerce: Integrating Trust and Risk with the Technology Acceptance Model , 2003, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[60]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges , 2007 .

[61]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Not So Different After All: A Cross-Discipline View Of Trust , 1998 .

[62]  Peter M. Sandman,et al.  Risk Communication , 1988 .