Who Should I Trust: AI or Myself? Leveraging Human and AI Correctness Likelihood to Promote Appropriate Trust in AI-Assisted Decision-Making
read the original abstract
In AI-assisted decision-making, it is critical for human decision-makers to know when to trust AI and when to trust themselves. However, prior studies calibrated human trust only based on AI confidence indicating AI's correctness likelihood (CL) but ignored humans' CL, hindering optimal team decision-making. To mitigate this gap, we proposed to promote humans' appropriate trust based on the CL of both sides at a task-instance level. We first modeled humans' CL by approximating their decision-making models and computing their potential performance in similar instances. We demonstrated the feasibility and effectiveness of our model via two preliminary studies. Then, we proposed three CL exploitation strategies to calibrate users' trust explicitly/implicitly in the AI-assisted decision-making process. Results from a between-subjects experiment (N=293) showed that our CL exploitation strategies promoted more appropriate human trust in AI, compared with only using AI confidence. We further provided practical implications for more human-compatible AI-assisted decision-making.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
An Empirical Study to Understand How Students Use ChatGPT for Writing Essays
An online study of 70 students found that gender, race, and self-efficacy predict distinct ChatGPT query patterns during essay writing, with patterns linked to enjoyment and perceived ownership of the final essay.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.