Who's the real expert here? Pedigree's unique bias on trust between human and automated advisers.

Objective: We assessed the effects of source type bias (human or automation) on adviser trust in a dual adviser decision-making task.

Background: Source type and reliability's effects on adviser trust have been studied in a dual-adviser context, but the influence of pedigree (perceived expertise) across source types lacked robust investigation. As situations with two decision-aids of uneven pedigree can easily arise, it is critical to understand how operators are biased towards a decision-aid of a certain source type and pedigree.

Method: A decision-making task similar to the paradigm of Convoy Leader (Lyons and Stokes, 2012) was given to participants, where a military convoy route had to be selected in the presence of IEDs and insurgent activity. We measured behavioral reliance and trust attitudes. Pedigree was manipulated via controlled adviser descriptions, in a manner consistent with past investigations (Madhavan and Wiegmann, 2007a).

Results: We found a trust bias towards the human adviser, reversed only when there is a far greater pedigree in the automated adviser. Trust attitudes were also strongly indicative of reliance behaviors.

Conclusion: Pedigree is a strong influencer of trust in a decision-aid and biased towards human advisers. Trust is highly predictive of reliance decisions.

Application: System designers must take care with how "expert" automation is portrayed, particularly if it is used in conjunction with other human advisers (e.g.: conflicting advice from air-traffic control and an onboard system).