In a controlled comparison, AI confidence levels and text explanations improved human-AI decision accuracy, while reflective questions and human feedback increased effort and reduced trust.
Exploring the Effect of Explanation Content and Format on User Comprehension and Trust in Healthcare
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
AI-driven tools for healthcare are widely acknowledged as potentially beneficial to health practitioners and patients, e.g. the QCancer regression tool for cancer risk prediction. However, for these tools to be trusted, they need to be supplemented with explanations. We examine how explanations' content and format affect user comprehension and trust when explaining QCancer's predictions. Regarding content, we deploy the SHAP and Occlusion-1 explanation methods. Regarding format, we present SHAP explanations, conventionally, as charts (SC) and Occlusion-1 explanations as charts (OC) as well as text (OT), to which their simpler nature lends itself. We conduct experiments with two sets of stakeholders: the general public (representing patients) and medical students (representing healthcare practitioners). Our experiments showed higher subjective comprehension and trust for Occlusion-1 over SHAP explanations based on content. However, when controlling for format, only OT outperformed SC, suggesting this trend is driven by preferences for text. Other findings corroborated that explanation format, rather than content, is often the critical factor.
citation-role summary
citation-polarity summary
fields
cs.HC 1years
2025 1verdicts
REJECT 1roles
background 1polarities
unclear 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
Engaging with AI: How Interface Design Shapes Human-AI Collaboration in High-Stakes Decision-Making
In a controlled comparison, AI confidence levels and text explanations improved human-AI decision accuracy, while reflective questions and human feedback increased effort and reduced trust.