A conceptual model of trust for indoor positioning systems

Bell, Scott; Wei, Ting; Jung, Wook Rak; Scott, Alyssa

doi:10.1145/2077357.2077360

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As signal propagation and attenuation are extremely complicated in indoor environments, these disturbances lead directly to highly variable results. In addition, accurate system calculation relies on the quality and completeness of the positioning source data (Bell, Wei, Jung, & Scott, 2011). However, it is unrealistic for all buildings to have the same density of sensors, structure, or router arrangement, all of which contribute to variation in indoor positioning systems' reliability.…”

Section: System Reliabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This design might not be apparent to naï ve users, as these users have limited knowledge of the basic principles of positioning systems. They are unlikely to be sensitive to such subtle changes in the location display or understand the implications of these changes (Bell, et al, 2011).…”

Section: Context Awarenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, individual differences exist even under similar conditions, and users bring their own knowledge and preferences to their judgments of system accuracy (Bell, et al, 2011). As a result, the speed and accuracy of the judgment process is highly dependent on a user's local knowledge, spatial ability, and confidence.…”

Section: System Accuracy Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, technical awareness (knowledge of the positioning technology) to some degree provides an opportunity to increase understanding when accuracy is low. If a user knows the principles of positioning calculation, their tolerance for positioning error could be higher than someone without this knowledge (Bell, et al, 2011). In addition, users having complete knowledge of the local environment tend to ignore the system's actual performance, which results in an inappropriate accuracy judgment (Stanton, Ragsdale, & Bustamante, 2009).…”

Section: System Accuracy Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Trust can be increased by improving perceived accuracy (from a user's perspective), which not only requires an accurate calculation with high quality data, but also a clear interface that communicates position and uncertainty (or accuracy) (Bell, et al, 2011).…”

Section: Definition and Impact Of Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Impact of Indoor Location Information Reliability on Users’ Trust of an Indoor Positioning System

Wei

Bell

2012

Geographic Information Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Indoor positioning systems have been used as a supplement to provide positioning in settings where GPS does not function. However, the accuracy of calculated results varies among techniques and algorithms used; system performance also differs across testing environments. As a result, users' responses to and opinions of these positioning results could be different. Furthermore, user trust, most closely associated with their confidence in the system, will also vary. A relatively little studied topic is the effect of positioning variance on a user's opinion or trust of such systems (GPS as well, for that matter). Therefore, understanding how user interaction with such systems (through trust) changes is important for achieving more usable positioning system design. An experiment was designed to examine if the sequence of location accuracy will affect users' trust in an individual episode positioning result as well as the system overall. The simulated positioning system running on an iPad used for this experiment provides 10 priming positioning results at a specific category of accuracy.The accuracy is controlled and is presented as either 1. ACCURATE (within 5 meters of actual location), 2. INACCURATE (greater 15 meters), 0r 3. WRONG BUILDING (outside current building's footprint). After one set of these priming locations a series of 55 post-priming locations across the same categories in addition to 10 CONTINUOUS locations (with between 6 and 15 meters of error) were presented. At each experimental site participants located themselves using the simulated system and rated their trust for that location. Variables obtained from the experiment include: 1. Two types of trust at each location (positioning trust and system trust); 2. Spatial abilities, sense of direction, and ancillary survey data (user characteristics). Results show that users' trust varies iii among different accuracy categories and changes over time according to the system performance in association with their own characteristics. Specifically, the accuracy of the priming locations has an impact on users' trust of later results. Besides, users' trust in individual positioning results is quite variable and the variability is closely related to accuracy, while user trust of the overall system is less variable.iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

show abstract

Section: System Reliabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Context Awarenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: System Accuracy Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: System Accuracy Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Definition and Impact Of Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations