Shlomo Berkovsky
Ronnie Taib
ABSTRACT
How much trust a user places in a recommender is crucial to the uptake of the recommendations. Although prior work established various factors that build and sustain user trust, their comparative impact has not been studied in depth. This paper presents the results of a crowdsourced study examining the impact of various recommendation interfaces and content selection strategies on user trust. It evaluates the subjective ranking of nine key factors of trust grouped into three dimensions and examines the differences observed with respect to users' personality traits.
- I. Benbasat and W. Wang. Trust in and adoption of online recommendation agents. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 6(3), 2005.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Y. Benjamini and Y. Hochberg. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), pages 289--300, 1995.Google ScholarCross Ref
- L. M. Collins, J. J. Dziak, and R. Li. Design of experiments with multiple independent variables: a resource management perspective on complete and reduced factorial designs. Psychological methods, 14(3):202, 2009.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. T. Costa and R. R. McCrae. Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and individual differences, 13(6):653--665, 1992.Google Scholar
- H. S. M. Cramer, V. Evers, S. Ramlal, M. van Someren, L. Rutledge, N. Stash, L. Aroyo, and B. J. Wielinga. The effects of transparency on trust in and acceptance of a content-based art recommender. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 18(5):455--496, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Dillon and C. Watson. User analysis in HCI the historical lessons from individual differences research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(6):619--637, 1996. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Felfernig and B. Gula. An empirical study on consumer behavior in the interaction with knowledge-based recommender applications. In Proceedings of the International Conference on E-Commerce Technology, CEC, page 37, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. N. Finnerty, B. Lepri, and F. Pianesi. Acquisition of personality. In Emotions and Personality in Personalized Services, pages 81--99. 2016.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. D. Gosling, P. J. Rentfrow, and W. B. Swann. A very brief measure of the big-five personality domains. Journal of Research in personality, 37(6):504--528, 2003.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Gunawardana and G. Shani. Evaluating recommender systems. In Recommender Systems Handbook, pages 265--308. 2015.Google ScholarCross Ref
- K. A. Hoff and M. Bashir. Trust in automation: Integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust. Human Factors, 57(3):407--434, 2015.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. Holliday, S. M. Wilson, and S. Stumpf. User trust in intelligent systems: A journey over time. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, IUI, pages 164--168, 2016. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Jameson, M. C. Willemsen, A. Felfernig, M. de Gemmis, P. Lops, G. Semeraro, and L. Chen. Human decision making and recommender systems. In Recommender Systems Handbook, pages 611--648. 2015.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. D. Johnson, J. Sanchez, A. D. Fisk, and W. A. Rogers. Type of automation failure: The effects on trust and reliance in automation. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, volume 48, pages 2163--2167, 2004.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Y. Komiak and I. Benbasat. The effects of personalization and familiarity on trust and adoption of recommendation agents. Management Information Systems Quarterly, pages 941--960, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. D. Lee and N. Moray. Trust, self-confidence, and operators' adaptation to automation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 40(1):153--184, 1994. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. D. Lee and K. A. See. Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46(1):50--80, 2004.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Matz, Y. W. F. Chan, and M. Kosinski. Models of personality. In Emotions and Personality in Personalized Services, pages 35--54. 2016.Google ScholarCross Ref
- N. Moray, T. Inagaki, and M. Itoh. Adaptive automation, trust, and self-confidence in fault management of time-critical tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6(1):44, 2000.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Nowak and S. M. Rüger. How reliable are annotations via crowdsourcing: a study about inter-annotator agreement for multi-label image annotation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Multimedia Information Retrieval, MIR, pages 557--566, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. O'Donovan and B. Smyth. Trust in recommender systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, IUI, pages 167--174, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- U. Panniello, M. Gorgoglione, and A. Tuzhilin. Research note In CARSs we trust: How context-aware recommendations affect customers' trust and other business performance measures of recommender systems. Information Systems Research, 27(1):182--196, 2016.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Pu and L. Chen. Trust building with explanation interfaces. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, IUI, pages 93--100, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Pu, L. Chen, and R. Hu. A user-centric evaluation framework for recommender systems. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, RecSys, pages 157--164, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- W. B. Rouse. Adaptive aiding for human/computer control. Human Factors, 30(4):431--443, 1988. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Said, S. Berkovsky, E. W. D. Luca, and J. Hermanns. Challenge on context-aware movie recommendation: Camra2011. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, RecSys, pages 385--386, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Sauer, A. Chavaillaz, and D. Wastell. Experience of automation failures in training: effects on trust, automation bias, complacency and performance. Ergonomics, pages 1--14, 2015.Google Scholar
- K. E. Schaefer and D. R. Scribner. Individual differences, trust, and vehicle autonomy a pilot study. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, volume 59, pages 786--790, 2015.Google Scholar
- J. Schrammel, C. Köffel, and M. Tscheligi. Personality traits, usage patterns and information disclosure in online communities. In Proceedings of the British Computer Society Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, BCS-HCI, pages 169--174, 2009. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. L. Scott. Interpersonal trust: A comparison of attitudinal and situational factors. Human Relations, 33(11):805--812, 1980.Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. Shani, L. Rokach, B. Shapira, S. Hadash, and M. Tangi. Investigating confidence displays for top-N recommendations. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 64(12):2548--2563, 2013.Google Scholar
- R. R. Sinha and K. Swearingen. Comparing recommendations made by online systems and friends. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Personalisation and Recommender Systems in Digital Libraries, 2001.Google Scholar
- K. Swearingen and R. Sinha. Interaction design for recommender systems. In Designing Interactive Systems, volume 6, pages 312--334, 2002.Google Scholar
- N. Tintarev and J. Masthoff. Explaining recommendations: Design and evaluation. In Recommender Systems Handbook, pages 353--382. 2015.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Tkalcic and L. Chen. Personality and recommender systems. In Recommender Systems Handbook, pages 715--739. 2015.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Victor, M. D. Cock, and C. Cornelis. Trust and recommendations. In Recommender Systems Handbook, pages 645--675. 2011.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Vinciarelli and G. Mohammadi. A survey of personality computing. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing, 5(3):273--291, 2014.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Y. D. Wang and H. H. Emurian. An overview of online trust: Concepts, elements, and implications. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(1):105--125, 2005.Google ScholarCross Ref
- W. Wu, L. Chen, and L. He. Using personality to adjust diversity in recommender systems. In Proceedings of the Conference on Hypertext and Social Media, HT, pages 225--229, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Xiao and I. Benbasat. The formation of trust and distrust in recommendation agents in repeated interactions: a process-tracing analysis. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Electronic Commerce, ICEC, pages 287--293, 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. H. Yoo, U. Gretzel, and M. Zanker. Source factors in recommender system credibility evaluation. In Recommender Systems Handbook, pages 689--714. 2015.Google ScholarCross Ref
- K. Yu, S. Berkovsky, D. Conway, R. Taib, J. Zhou, and F. Chen. Trust and reliance based on system accuracy. In Proceedings of the Conference on User Modeling Adaptation and Personalization, UMAP, pages 223--227, 2016. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Yu, S. Berkovsky, R. Taib, D. Conway, J. Zhou, and F. Chen. User trust dynamics: An investigation driven by differences in system performance. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, IUI, 2017. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- How to Recommend?: User Trust Factors in Movie Recommender Systems
Recommendations
Let Me Explain: Impact of Personal and Impersonal Explanations on Trust in Recommender Systems
CHI '19: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsTrust in a Recommender System (RS) is crucial for its overall success. However, it remains underexplored whether users trust personal recommendation sources (i.e. other humans) more than impersonal sources (i.e. conventional RS), and, if they do, ...
A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Trust in Recommender Systems
UMAP '18: Proceedings of the 26th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and PersonalizationUser system trust is critical to the uptake of recommendations, and several factors of trust have been identified and compared. In this paper we present a cross-cultural, crowdsourced study examining user perceptions of nine factors of trust and link ...
Putting Users in Control of their Recommendations
RecSys '15: Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Recommender SystemsThe essence of a recommender system is that it can recommend items personalized to the preferences of an individual user. But typically users are given no explicit control over this personalization, and are instead left guessing about how their actions ...
Comments