English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The role of intelligent agents becomes more social as they are expected to act in direct interaction, involvement and/or interdependency with humans and other artificial entities, as in Human-Agent Teams (HAT). The highly interdependent and dynamic nature of teamwork demands correctly calibrated trust among team members. Trust violations are an inevitable aspect of the cycle of trust and since repairing damaged trust proves to be more difficult than building trust initially, effective trust repair strategies are needed to ensure durable and successful team performance. The aim of this study was to explore the effectiveness of different trust repair strategies from an intelligent agent by measuring the development of human trust and advice taking in a Human-Agent Teaming task. Data for this study were obtained using a task environment resembling a first-person shooter game. Participants carried out a mission in collaboration with their artificial team member. A trust violation was provoked when the agent failed to detect an approaching enemy. After this, the agent offered one of four trust repair strategies, composed of the apology components  explanation  and  expression of regret  (either one alone, both or neither). Our results indicated that expressing regret was crucial for effective trust repair. After trust declined due to the violation by the agent, trust only significantly recovered when an expression of regret was included in the apology. This effect was stronger when an explanation was added. In this context, the intelligent agent was the most effective in its attempt of rebuilding trust when it provided an apology that was both affective, and informational. Finally, the implications of our findings for the design and study of Human-Agent trust repair are discussed.

Trust repair in human-agent teams: the effectiveness of explanations and expressing regret