Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …


Journal of Interactive Media

Editor-in-Chief: Ziegler, Jürgen

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 17, Issue 1


Trust in Automated Vehicles

What We Can Learn From Dynamic Web Service Design

Alexander G. Mirnig / Sandra Trösterer / Alexander Meschtscherjakov / Magdalena Gärtner / Manfred Tscheligi
Published Online: 2018-03-27 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/icom-2017-0031


Increasing degrees of automation in on-road vehicles bear great potential for heightened driver safety and traffic efficiency in both the near and far future. The more the driver delegates control to the vehicle, the more salient the issue of trust in automated technology becomes. Misaligned trust can lead to mishandling of automation controls in individual instances and decreases the general acceptance of on-road automation on a broader scale. In this paper, we apply insights from trust research for dynamic web service interaction to the novel automated driving domain, in order to scope the problem space regarding trust in automated vehicles. We conclude that the appropriate communication of trustworthiness, the necessity to calibrate trust, the importance of intervention capabilities by the driver, and the unambiguous transparency of locus of control are all important aspects when in comes to understanding trust in automated vehicles.

Keywords: automated vehicles; trust; trustworthiness; technology acceptance; dynamic web services


  • [1]

    Mark S. Ackerman, Lorrie Faith Cranor, and Joseph Reagle. Privacy in e-commerce: Examining user scenarios and privacy preferences. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, EC ’99, pages 1–8, New York, NY, USA, 1999. ACM.Google Scholar

  • [2]

    Barber. The logic and limits of trust. 1983. Ref’d by gambetta-1988a near key area of interest.

  • [3]

    Daniel Belanche, Luis Casaló Ariño, and Miguel Guinalíu. How to make online public services trustworthy. 9:291–308, 07 2012.

  • [4]

    Klaus Bengler, Klaus Dietmayer, Berthold Farber, Markus Maurer, Christoph Stiller, and Hermann Winner. Three decades of driver assistance systems: Review and future perspectives. IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Magazine, 6(4):6–22, 2014.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [5]

    Achim D. Brucker, Francesco Malmignati, Madjid Merabti, Qi Shi, and Bo Zhou. The Aniketos Service Composition Framework, pages 121–135. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2014.Google Scholar

  • [6]

    C. Clases. Vertrauen [trust]. Dorsch – Lexikon der Psychologie [Dorsch – encyclopedia of psychology], 2016.

  • [7]

    ERTRAC Task Force “Connectivity and Automated Driving”. Automated driving roadmap version 7.0. Online Article, June 2017. Retrieved December, 2017 from http://www.ertrac.org/uploads/documentsearch/id48/ERTRAC_Automated_Driving_2017.pdf.Google Scholar

  • [8]

    Efthymios Constantinides, Marius Kahlert, and Sjoerd A. de Vries. The relevance of technological autonomy in the acceptance of iot services in retail. 2017.

  • [9]

    Cynthia L. Corritore, Beverly Kracher, and Susan Wiedenbeck. On-line trust: Concepts, evolving themes, a model. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud., 58(6):737–758, June 2003.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [10]

    Fred D. Davis. A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1985.

  • [11]

    Steve Diller, Lynn Lin, and Vania Tashjian. The Evolving Role of Security, Privacy, and Trust in a Digitized World. In The human-computer interaction handbook, pages 1213–1225. L. Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 2003.Google Scholar

  • [12]

    Mary Dzindolet, Scott A. Peterson, Regina A. Pomranky, Linda Pierce, and Hall Beck. The role of trust in automation reliance. 58:697–718, 06 2003.

  • [13]

    Anna Feldhütter, Christian Gold, Adrian Hüger, and Klaus Bengler. Trust in automation as a matter of media influence and experience of automated vehicles. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, volume 60, pages 2024–2028. SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA, 2016.Google Scholar

  • [14]

    Carlos Flavián, Miguel Guinalíu, and Raquel Gurrea. The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Inf. Manage., 43(1):1–14, January 2006.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [15]

    Christian Gold, Moritz Körber, Christoph Hohenberger, David Lechner, and Klaus Bengler. Trust in automation–before and after the experience of take-over scenarios in a highly automated vehicle. Procedia Manufacturing, 3:3025–3032, 2015.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [16]

    The Guardian. Tesla driver dies in first fatal crash while using autopilot mode. Online Article, July 2016. Retrieved December, 2017 from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/30/tesla-autopilot-death-self-driving-car-elon-musk.Google Scholar

  • [17]

    Kevin Anthony Hoff and Masooda Bashir. Trust in automation: Integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust. Human Factors, 57(3):407–434, 2015. PMID: 25875432.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [18]

    J. Johnston, J. H. P. Eloff, and Les Labuschagne. Security and human computer interfaces. 22:675–684, 12 2003.

  • [19]

    John D. Lee and Katrina A. See. Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46(1):50–80, 2004. PMID: 15151155.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [20]

    Nikola Marangunić and Andrina Granić. Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14(1):81–95, 2015.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [21]

    Per Håkon Meland, Erkuden Rios, Vasilis Tountopoulos, and Achim D. Brucker. The Aniketos Platform, pages 50–62. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2014.Google Scholar

  • [22]

    Alexander Mirnig, Sandra Trösterer, Elke Beck, and Manfred Tscheligi. To trust or not to trust. In S. Sauer, C. Bogdan, P. Forbrig, R. Bernhaupt, and M. Winckler, editors, Human-Centered Software Engineering, volume 8742 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 164–181. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2014.Google Scholar

  • [23]

    Alexander G. Mirnig, Philipp Wintersberger, Christine Sutter, and Jürgen Ziegler. A framework for analyzing and calibrating trust in automated vehicles. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, AutomotiveUI ’16 Adjunct, pages 33–38, New York, NY, USA, 2016. ACM.Google Scholar

  • [24]

    Andrew Patrick, Stephen Marsh, and Pamela Briggs. Designing systems that people will trust. 2005.

  • [25]

    Aneesh Paul, Rohan Chauhan, Rituraj Srivastava, and Mriganka Baruah. Advanced driver assistance systems. Technical report, SAE Technical Paper, 2016.

  • [26]

    J. Piao and Mike McDonald. Advanced driver assistance systems from autonomous to cooperative approach. Transport Reviews, 28(5):659–684, 2008.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [27]

    D. G. Pruitt, S. H. Kim, and J. Z. Rubin. Social conflict: escalation, stalemate, and settlement. McGraw-Hill series in social psychology. McGraw-Hill, 2004.Google Scholar

  • [28]

    Bryan Reimer. Driver assistance systems and the transition to automated vehicles: A path to increase older adult safety and mobility? Public Policy & Aging Report, 24(1):27–31, 2014.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [29]

    Jens Riegelsberger, Angela Sasse, and John D. McCarthy. The researcher’s dilemma: Evaluating trust in computer-mediated communication. 58:759–781, 06 2003.

  • [30]

    Jens Riegelsberger, M. Angela Sasse, and John D. McCarthy. The mechanics of trust: A framework for research and design. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud., 62(3):381–422, March 2005.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [31]

    Julian B. Rotter. A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust1. Journal of Personality, 35(4):651–665, 1967.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [32]

    International SAE. Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to on-road motor vehicle automated driving systems. Standard J3016, 2016.

  • [33]

    Tesla S Official Press Materials. Retrieved Oct. 2017.

  • [34]

    Wired. Ford’s skipping the trickiest thing about self-driving cars. Online Article, October 2015. Retrieved April, 2017 from https://www.wired.com/2015/11/ford-self-driving-car-plan-google/.Google Scholar

About the article

Alexander G. Mirnig

Mag. phil. Alexander Mirnig, Research Fellow at the Center for Human-Computer Interaction, University of Salzburg. Areas of Expertise: Human-Computer Interaction in Semiautomated Vehicles, Design Patterns, Philosophy of Science for HCI.

Sandra Trösterer

Mag. rer. nat. Sandra Trösterer, HCI research fellow at the Center for Human-Computer Interaction, University of Salzburg. Area of work: Investigation of user interfaces, requirements, behavior, and experiences in dedicated research fields of the automotive domain, i. e., automated driving, in-car collaboration, and driver distraction.

Alexander Meschtscherjakov

Dipl. Ing. Dr. Alexander Meschtscherjakov, Assistant Professor at the Center for Human-Computer Interaction, Department of Computer Sciences, University of Salzburg. Areas of expertise: Persuasive Interaction Technologies, Automotive User Interfaces, Contextual User Experience (UX).

Magdalena Gärtner

Magdalena Gärtner, MA is a Research Fellow at the Center for Human Computer Interaction of the University of Salzburg. She holds a Master’s Degree in Communication Science with an emphasis on Human Computer Interaction (HCI). In her research, she focuses on different user groups (e. g., drivers) and their adoption of and interaction with new technologies (e. g., advanced driver assistance systems). Furthermore, she is engaged in the application, evaluation, and enhancement of user-centered research methods.

Manfred Tscheligi

The image of Prof. Tscheligi is © Elke Holzmann and used with permission. Univ-Prof. Dr. Manfred Tscheligi, Head of the Center for Human-Computer Interaction, Professor at the Department of Computer Sciences, University of Salzburg. Areas of Expertise: Human-Computer Interaction, User Experience Research, Contextual Interfaces, Advanced Interaction Techniques and Approaches, Research by Design and Materiality, UX Methods & Tools.

Published Online: 2018-03-27

Published in Print: 2018-04-25

Funding Source: Austrian Science Fund

Award identifier / Grant number: I 2126- N15

The financial support by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF): I 2126- N15 is gratefully acknowledged.

Citation Information: i-com, Volume 17, Issue 1, Pages 79–90, ISSN (Online) 2196-6826, ISSN (Print) 1618-162X, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/icom-2017-0031.

Export Citation

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

Stavros Tasoudis and Mark Perry
Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 2018, Volume 2, Number 4, Page 74

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in