ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Who Gets More Trust-AI or Humans, and Why? A Cross-Cultural Analysis of AI and Interpersonal Trust.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
As artificial intelligence (AI) systems become increasingly embedded in social contexts, understanding how individuals develop trust in AI relative to humans is critical. This study investigates the relative levels of trust in AI agents (embodied and disembodied) versus human social targets (intimate, intermediate, and distant groups), the psychological mechanisms underlying these trust patterns, and the potential cross-cultural differences between China and U.S. Moderated mediation models were tested to gain insights into how deception experience may affect trust via risk and trust propensity, with perceived honesty norms moderating the mediator-to-outcome pathways. Across both cultures, a consistent trust hierarchy emerged-AI was trusted less than close others but more than distant others. It is likely that, in China, embodied AI was evaluated through interpersonal trust schemas, while in the United States, AI was treated largely as a functional tool regardless of embodiment. Together, these findings clarify both the structure and the processes of AI trust, advancing theoretical debates over whether AI trust mirrors interpersonal trust and offering practical insights for designing culturally adaptive, trustworthy AI systems.
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.