When people are defeated by artificial intelligence in a competition task requiring logical thinking, how do they make causal attribution?

Given that artificial intelligence (AI) has been predicted to eventually take on human tasks demanding logical thinking, it makes sense that we should examine psychological responses of humans when their performance is inferior to AI. Research has demonstrated that after people fail a task, whether they reorient their behavior towards success depends on what they attribute the failure to. This study investigated the causal attributions people made in a competition task requiring such thinking. We also recorded whether they wanted to re-challenge the games after they were defeated by AI. Experiments 1 (N = 74) and 2 (N = 788) recruited Japanese participants, while Experiment 3 (N = 500) comprised American participants. There were two conditions: in the first, participants competed against an AI opponent and in the other, they believed they were competing against a human. The results of the three experiments showed that participants attributed the loss to their own and their opponent's abilities more than any other factor, irrespective of the opponent type. The number of participants choosing to re-challenge the game did not differ significantly between the AI and human conditions in Experiments 1 and 3, although the number was lower in the AI condition than in the human condition in Experiment 2. Besides providing fresh insight on how people make causal attributions when competing against AI, our findings also predict how people will respond after their jobs are replaced by AI. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-021-02559-w.

Trust in Autonomous Cars: Exploring the Role of Shared Moral Values, Reasoning, and Emotion in Safety-Critical Decisions.

OBJECTIVE: Autonomous cars (ACs) controlled by artificial intelligence are expected to play a significant role in transportation in the near future. This study investigated determinants of trust in ACs. BACKGROUND: Trust in ACs influences different variables, including the intention to adopt AC technology. Several studies on risk perception have verified that shared value determines trust in risk managers. Previous research has confirmed the effect of value similarity on trust in artificial intelligence. We focused on moral beliefs, specifically utilitarianism (belief in promoting a greater good) and deontology (belief in condemning deliberate harm), and tested the effects of shared moral beliefs on trust in ACs. METHOD: We conducted three experiments (N = 128, 71, and 196, for each), adopting a thought experiment similar to the well-known trolley problem. We manipulated shared moral beliefs (shared vs. unshared) and driver (AC vs. human), providing participants with different moral dilemma scenarios. Trust in ACs was measured through a questionnaire. RESULTS: The results of Experiment 1 showed that shared utilitarian belief strongly influenced trust in ACs. In Experiment 2 and Experiment 3, however, we did not find statistical evidence that shared deontological belief had an effect on trust in ACs. CONCLUSION: The results of the three experiments suggest that the effect of shared moral beliefs on trust varies depending on the values that ACs share with humans. APPLICATION: To promote AC implementation, policymakers and developers need to understand which values are shared between ACs and humans to enhance trust in ACs.

Residents' Reactions to Earthquake Early Warnings in Japan.

This article empirically examines the effectiveness of earthquake early warning (EEW) in Japan based on experiences of residents who received warnings before earthquake shaking occurred. In Study 1, a survey (N = 299) was conducted to investigate residents' experiences of, and reactions to, an EEW issued in Gunma and neighboring regions on June 17, 2018. The main results were as follows. (1) People's primary reactions to the EEW were mental, not physical, and thus motionless. Most residents stayed still, not for safety reasons, but because they were focusing on mentally bracing themselves. (2) Residents perceived the EEW to be effective because it enabled them to mentally prepare, rather than take physical protective actions, before strong shaking arrived. (3) In future, residents anticipate that on receipt of an EEW they would undertake mental preparation as opposed to physical protective actions. In Study 2, a survey (N = 450) was conducted on another EEW issued for an earthquake offshore of Chiba Prefecture on July 7, 2018. Results were in line with those of Study 1, suggesting that the findings described above are robust. Finally, given people's lack of impetus to undertake protective action on receipt of an EEW, this article discusses ways to enhance such actions.

Effects of Acknowledging Uncertainty about Earthquake Risk Estimates on San Francisco Bay Area Residents' Beliefs, Attitudes, and Intentions.

We test here the risk communication proposition that explicit expert acknowledgment of uncertainty in risk estimates can enhance trust and other reactions. We manipulated such a scientific uncertainty message, accompanied by probabilities (20%, 70%, implicit ["will occur"] 100%) and time periods (10 or 30 years) in major (≥magnitude 8) earthquake risk estimates to test potential effects on residents potentially affected by seismic activity on the San Andreas fault in the San Francisco Bay Area (n = 750). The uncertainty acknowledgment increased belief that these specific experts were more honest and open, and led to statistically (but not substantively) significant increases in trust in seismic experts generally only for the 20% probability (vs. certainty) and shorter versus longer time period. The acknowledgment did not change judged risk, preparedness intentions, or mitigation policy support. Probability effects independent of the explicit admission of expert uncertainty were also insignificant except for judged risk, which rose or fell slightly depending upon the measure of judged risk used. Overall, both qualitative expressions of uncertainty and quantitative probabilities had limited effects on public reaction. These results imply that both theoretical arguments for positive effects, and practitioners' potential concerns for negative effects, of uncertainty expression may have been overblown. There may be good reasons to still acknowledge experts' uncertainties, but those merit separate justification and their own empirical tests.

Examining public trust in risk-managing organizations after a major disaster.

This research investigates the public's trust in risk-managing organizations after suffering serious damage from a major disaster. It is natural for public trust to decrease in organizations responsible for mitigating the damage. However, what about trust in organizations that address hazards not directly related to the disaster? Based on the results of surveys conducted by a national institute, the Japanese government concluded, in a White Paper on Science and Technology, that the public's trust in scientists declined overall after the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake. Because scientists play a key role in risk assessment and risk management in most areas, one could predict that trust in risk-managing organizations overall would decrease after a major disaster. The methodology of that survey, however, had limitations that prevented such conclusions. For this research, two surveys were conducted to measure the public's trust in risk-managing organizations regarding various hazards, before and after the Tohoku Earthquake (n = 1,192 in 2008 and n = 1,138 in 2012). The results showed that trust decreased in risk-managing organizations that deal with earthquakes and nuclear accidents, whereas trust levels related to many other hazards, especially in areas not touched by the Tohoku Earthquake, remained steady or even increased. These results reject the assertion that distrust rippled through all risk-managing organizations. The implications of this research are discussed, with the observation that this result is not necessarily gratifying for risk managers because high trust sometimes reduces public preparedness for disasters.

Public judgment on science expenditure in the national budget of Japan: An experimental approach to examining the effects of unpacking science.

How does the public assess an appropriate financial allocation to science promotion? This article empirically examined the subadditivity effect in the judgment of budgetary allocation. Results of the first experiment showed that the ratio of the national budget allocated for science promotion by participants increased when science was decomposed into more specific categories compared to when it was presented as "science promotion" alone. Consistent with these findings, results of the second experiment showed that the allotment ratio to science promotion decreased when the number of other expenditure items increased. Meanwhile, the third experiment revealed that in the case of a budgetary cutback, the total amount taken from science promotion greatly increased when science was decomposed into subcategories. The subadditivity effect and increase in the total allotment ratio by unpacking science promotion was confirmed by these three experiments not only on budgetary allocation but also on budgetary cutback.

[Trust in organizations concerned with risks of the Great East Japan Earthquake].

This study investigated the levels of public trust in organizations associated with the Great East Japan Earthquake. In Study 1 (N = 639), the levels of trust in eight organizations as well as the determinants of trust--perceived salient value similarity (SVS), ability, and motivation--were measured twice, first immediately after the earthquake and then a year later. The results indicated that the trust levels for six of the eight organizations had been preserved, supporting the double asymmetric effect of trust. The results of structural equation modeling (SEM) revealed that SVS explained trust more when the organization had been less trusted. Trust in the organization explains well the perceived reduction of the target risk. The results of SEM in Study 2 (N = 1,030) replicated those of Study 1, suggesting the stability of the explanatory power of the determinants of trust. Implications of the study for risk management practices are discussed.

The unintended effects of risk-refuting information on anxiety.

Researchers in the field of risk perception have been asking why people are more worried about risk today than in years past. This article explores one possible answer to this question, associative anxiety. The affect heuristic and the mental network models suggest that anxiety triggered by information regarding a particular risk can spread to other risks of the same category. Research to date, however, has not examined how information refuting the particular risk can also be generalized across other risks. The article presents two experimental studies addressing this issue. Study 1 showed that when participants were presented with information based on a real train collision, they experienced increased anxiety not only about train collisions but also about public transportation in general. In contrast, those who were informed about the train collision case as well as the preventative measures implemented after the accident experienced decreased anxiety about train collisions but not about public transportation more generally. Study 2 measured the changes in participant anxiety about a genetically modified organism (GMO) and compared the influence of information about either the existence or nonexistence of its risk. Similar to Study 1, associative anxiety rippled through the risk category. The results also suggest that the follow-up information refuting the GMO risk reduced the anxiety toward the hazard drastically, but did not fully alleviate the anxiety toward other hazards in the category. The implications and the limitations of these studies are also discussed.

A comparison of perceived effectiveness of preventive behaviors against COVID-19 between the public and medical experts: Not so different in means, but in distributions.

This brief report documents the results of a survey that measured the public's and doctors' perceived effectiveness of preventive behaviors against COVID-19, in Japan. Medical doctors (n = 117) and the general public (n = 1086) participated in our online survey. The results of the analysis of mean scores indicate that there were only slight differences in perceived effectiveness between the two groups, while the differences in distributions were remarkable. The results of Silverman's test suggest the unimodality of doctors' responses and multimodality of the public's responses. Implications of the findings to combat the risk of infection are discussed.

[The relationship between trust in risk management and anxiety about risk: analyses based on a range of risks].

The present research investigated the relationship between public anxiety about a variety of risks and trust in the management of each risk. Adults (N = 2,200) were selected from the residents' basic registers using a stratified two-step random sampling method. Of this sample, 1,192 (54.2%) rated their anxiety toward 51 kinds of risks and their trust in the management of each risk. Six-point scales were utilized for their ratings. The results demonstrated that the more the risk management was trusted, the less the risk was of concern. The basic statistics for the trust ratings are provided for the discussion of societal risk governance. The implications and limitations of the present findings are discussed.

Public trust in government concerning tobacco control in Japan.

This study investigated public trust and its determinants concerning the government's control of tobacco in Japan. We focused on the two issues of government policies to ban smoking by minors and increase taxes on tobacco. We conducted a questionnaire survey in which respondents were asked to assess their trust in the government, the government's fairness and competency, and their value similarity with the government. One thousand three hundred and ninety-four respondents agreed to participate in the survey out of 2,600 randomly sampled adults over 20 years old from all over Japan. The results of multiple regression analysis confirmed that value similarity is the strongest predictor of public trust in the government. On the affirmatively supported issue of prohibiting smoking among minors, the results further indicated that assessment of competency is a stronger predictor than assessment of fairness. In contrast, assessment of fairness is a stronger predictor than assessment of competency for the still divided issue of increasing tobacco tax. Respondents who had low concern and had not formed clear opinions on the issues showed a weak link between assessment of value similarity and trust. Based on these findings, we considered the implications for the government's implementation of tobacco controls.

Why Do Japanese People Use Masks Against COVID-19, Even Though Masks Are Unlikely to Offer Protection From Infection?

Wearing masks against 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) is beneficial in suppressing pandemic spread, not through preventing the wearer from being infected but by preventing the wearer from infecting others. Despite not providing much protection, the custom of wearing masks has prevailed in East Asia from the early stages of the pandemic, especially in Japan, to such an extent that it caused a shortfall in supply. Why do many Japanese people wear masks during the COVID-19 pandemic, even though masks are unlikely to prevent them from getting infected? We examined six possible psychological reasons for wearing masks: three involved expectations about the risk of infection and three involved other driving psychological forces. The results of our nationwide survey revealed that people conformed to societal norms in wearing masks and felt relief from anxiety when wearing masks. However, risk reduction expectations did not affect mask usage. The social psychological motivations successfully explained much about mask usage. Our findings suggest that policymakers responsible for public health should consider social motivations when implementing public strategies to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Effects of the Passage of Time from the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake on the Public's Anxiety about a Variety of Hazards.

This research investigated whether the Japanese people's anxiety about a variety of hazards, including earthquakes and nuclear accidents, has changed over time since the Tohoku Earthquake in 2011. Data from three nationwide surveys conducted in 2008, 2012, and 2015 were compared to see the change in societal levels of anxiety toward 51 types of hazards. The same two-phase stratified random sampling method was used to create the list of participants in each survey. The results showed that anxiety about earthquakes and nuclear accidents had increased for a time after the Tohoku Earthquake, and then decreased after a four-year time frame with no severe earthquakes and nuclear accidents. It was also revealed that the anxiety level for some hazards other than earthquakes and nuclear accidents had decreased at ten months after the Earthquake, and then remained unchanged after the four years. Therefore, ironically, a major disaster might decrease the public anxiety in general at least for several years.

[Influences of hostage posting on estimation of trustworthiness: the effects of voluntary posting and reliable results].

This research examined the effects of providing a monitoring and self-sanctioning system, called "hostage posting" in economics, on the improvement of trustworthiness. We conducted two questionnaire-type experiments to compare the trust-improving effects among the three conditions, (a) a voluntary provision of a monitoring and self-sanction system by the manager, (b) an imposed provision, and (c) an achievement of satisfactory management without any types of provisions. Total of 561 undergraduate students participated in the experiments. Results revealed that perceived integrity and competence were improved to almost the same level in both conditions (a) and (c), whereas these were not improved in condition (b). Consistent with our previous research, these results showed that the voluntary hostage posting improved trustworthiness level as well as a good performance did. The estimation of necessity of the system, however, was not different across these conditions. The implications for management practice and directions for future research were discussed.