<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
This paper investigates trustworthiness in the public debate about the reliability of large-language model-based chatbots, such as ChatGPT by applying a mixed-method approach to German data from the German Digital Dictionary (DWDS). The paper aims to account for how trustworthiness in human-machine interaction can be quantified and how to obtain a domain-independent set of trust-relevant linguistic cues. We use manual annotation in Maxqda to obtain trust-related linguistic markers and identify the level of trustworthiness indicated by them. Afterwards, given that trustworthiness is a complex trust-related phenomenon with cognitive and affective properties, we explore the correlation between the level of trustworthiness with sentiment scores for trust-related markers obtained by human ratings, machine learning and lexicon-based sentiment models. The results indicate a high correlation between positive sentiment scores obtained by sentiment models and trustworthiness obtained by human annotation. In this regard, sentiment analysis also provides evidence for the quantification of emotional aspects of trust.
Paper, Kontextsetzung, Sprache, Vortrag, Annotieren, Modellierung, trust, manual annotation, artificial intelligence, Methoden, sentiment analysis, DHd2024, large language models, mixed-method approach, Inhaltsanalyse
Paper, Kontextsetzung, Sprache, Vortrag, Annotieren, Modellierung, trust, manual annotation, artificial intelligence, Methoden, sentiment analysis, DHd2024, large language models, mixed-method approach, Inhaltsanalyse
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |