ArticlePloS one2025
Understanding dimensions of trust in AI through quantitative cognition: Implications for human-AI collaboration.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Construction and validation of the Emotional Trust in Artificial Intelligence Scale (CEIA).Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Beyond facilitation and inhibition: a configurational mechanism study of cognitive transitions in human-AI collaboration.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Modeling AI trust and AI self-efficacy in AI-assisted EFL classrooms: the role of basic psychological needs in classroom engagement.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Reframing individual roles in collaboration: digital identity construction and adaptive mechanisms for resistance-based professional skills in AI-human intelligence symbiosis.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human-AI collaborative innovation relies on effective and clearly defined role allocation, yet empirical research in this area remains limited. To address this gap, we construct a cognitive taxonomy trust in AI framework to describe and explain its interactive mechanisms in human-AI collaboration, specifically its complementary and inhibitive effects. Specifically, we examine the alignment between trust in AI and different cognitive levels, identifying key drivers that facilitate both lower-order and higher-order cognition through AI. Furthermore, by analyzing the interactive effects of multidimensional trust in AI, we explore its complementary and inhibitive influences. We collected data from finance and business administration interns using surveys and the After-Action Review method and analyzed them using the gradient descent algorithm. The findings reveal a dual effect of trust in AI on cognition: while functional and emotional trust enhance higher-order cognition, the transparency dimension of cognitive trust inhibits cognitive processes. These insights provide a theoretical foundation for understanding trust in AI in human-AI collaboration and offer practical guidance for university-industry partnerships and knowledge innovation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.