skip to main content
10.1145/3136755.3136764acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesicmi-mlmiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Trust triggers for multimodal command and control interfaces

Published:03 November 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

For autonomous systems to be accepted by society and operators, they have to instil the appropriate level of trust. In this paper, we discuss what dimensions constitute trust and examine certain triggers of trust for an autonomous underwater vehicle, comparing a multimodal command and control interface with a language-only reporting system. We conclude that there is a relationship between perceived trust and the clarity of a user's Mental Model and that this Mental Model is clearer in a multimodal condition, compared to language-only. Regarding trust triggers, we are able to show that a number of triggers, such as anomalous sensor readings, noticeably modify the perceived trust of the subjects, but in an appropriate manner, thus illustrating the utility of the interface.

References

  1. M.L. Cummings. 2004. The Need for Command and Control Instant Message Adaptive Interfaces: Lessons Learned from Tactical Tomahawk Human-in-the-Loop Simulations. Cyberpsychology and behaviour 7, 6 (2004).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Dimitra Gkatzia, Oliver Lemon, and Verena Rieser. 2016. Natural Language Generation enhances human decision-making with uncertain information. In ACL 2016: HLT - 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Proceedings of the Conference. arXiv: arXiv:1606.03254v1Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Helen Hastie, Xingkun Liu, Pedro Patron, and Yvan Petillot. Talking Autonomous Vehicles: Automatic AUV Mission Analysis in Natural Language. In Proceedings of OCEANS MTS/IEEE, Aberdeen, UK (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. H.Hastie, X. Liu, and P. Patron. 2016. A Demonstration of Multimodal Debrief Generation for AUVs, Post-mission and In-mission. In Proceedings of ICMI. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Nick Johnson, Pedro Patron, and David Lane. 2007. The importance of trust between operator and AUV: Crossing the human/computer language barrier. In Proceedings of OCEANS MTS/IEEE, Aberdeen, UK.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. P N Johnson-Laird. 1989. Mental Models. In Foundations of Cognitive Science. 469–499. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Sherman Kent. 1964. Words of Estimative Probability. In National Estimates Collected Essays.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Haleh Kootval. 2008. Guidelines on Communicating Forecast Uncertainty, a World Meteorological Organisation Report. (2008).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Karin Leichtenstern, Elisabeth André, and Ekaterina Kurdyukova. 2010. Managing user trust for self-adaptive ubiquitous computing systems. In MoMM’2010 - The Eighth International Conference on Advances in Mobile Computing and Multimedia, 8-10 November 2010, Paris, France. 409–414. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Yuhua Liang and Seungcheol Austin Lee. 2016. Advancing the Strategic Messages Affecting Robot Trust Effect: The Dynamic of User-and Robot-Generated Content on Human–Robot Trust and Interaction Outcomes. Cyberpsychology, Behaviour and Social Networking 19, 9 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Jo Lumsden. 2009. Triggering Trust: To What Extent Does the Question Influence the Answer When Evaluating the Perceived Importance of Trust Triggers?. In Proceedings of HCI. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Scott Ososky, David Schuster, Elizabeth Phillips, and Florian Jentsch. 2013. Building Appropriate Trust in Human-Robot Teams Mental Models : Building Blocks of Trust. AAAI Spring Symposium (2013), 60–65.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Pedro Patron, Yan Pailhas, Joel Cartwright, Francesco Maurelli, Yvan Petillot, Jamil Sawas, and Nicolas Valeyrie. 2011. Fully integrated multi-vehicles mine countermeasure missions. In Proceedings of UAM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Vittorio Perera, Sai P Selveraj, Stephanie Rosenthal, and Manuela Veloso. 2016. Dynamic Generation and Refinement of Robot Verbalization. In Proceedings of ROMAN.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Nava Tintarev and Roman Kutlak. 2014. SAsSy-Making Decisions Transparent with Argumentation and Natural Language Generation. In Proceedings of IUI. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Sandra Wachter, Brent Mittelstadt, and Luciano Floridi. 2016. Why a Right to Explanation of Automated Decision-Making Does Not Exist in the General Data Protection Regulation. International Data Privacy Law (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Marilyn A. Walker, Alex Rudnicky, Rashmi Prasad, John Aberdeen, Elizabeth Owen Bratt, John Garofolo, Helen Hastie, Audrey Le, Bryan Pellom, Alex Potamianos, Rebecca Passonneau, Salim Roukos, Greg S, Stephanie Seneff, and Dave Stallard. 2002. DARPA Communicator: Cross-System Results for the 2001 Evaluation. In Proceedings of ICSLP 2002. 269–272.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Ning Wang, David V Pynadath, and Susan G Hill. 2016. The Impact of POMDPGenerated Explanations on Trust and Performance in Human-Robot Teams. In Proceedings of AAMAS. 997–1005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Trust triggers for multimodal command and control interfaces

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          ICMI '17: Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction
          November 2017
          676 pages
          ISBN:9781450355438
          DOI:10.1145/3136755

          Copyright © 2017 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 3 November 2017

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          ICMI '17 Paper Acceptance Rate65of149submissions,44%Overall Acceptance Rate453of1,080submissions,42%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader