Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evaluates epistemic trust in generative AI, suggesting implications for AI literacy.
As generative AI increasingly mediates everyday information, users must judge not only whether a claim is true but whether the system conveying it is a legitimate source of belief. This article develops and validates the Trust in AI-Epistemic Scale (TAI-E), measuring epistemic trust in generative AI across three dimensions: attribution of epistemic authority, perceived epistemic reliability, and suspension of critical judgment. In a survey of part-time higher-education students (N = 412; ages 18–63), the three-factor structure was replicated across a calibration–validation split (CFI = 0.944; RMSEA = 0.085; subscale α = 0.84–0.87). Granting a system epistemic authority and suspending critical judgment toward it behaved as partly opposing stances, so the scale captures a configuration rather than a single trust score. Self-reported reflective processing accompanied higher authority and reliability attributions together with greater critical engagement. Most strikingly, self-reported reflectiveness barely tracked behavioural cognitive reflection (r = 0.14), and only the self-report predicted trust—suggesting it reflects epistemic self-image as much as reflective capacity. Relations among constructs are reported as construct-validity associations rather than causal effects. The TAI-E provides a psychometrically grounded tool for studying epistemic trust, AI literacy, and well-founded reliance on AI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
László Balázs (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: