Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Emerging Reliance Behaviors in Human-AI Content Grounded Data Generation: The Role of Cognitive Forcing Functions and Hallucinations

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2409.08937 v2 pith:XGUESL3F submitted 2024-09-13 cs.HC

classification cs.HC
keywords datacognitiveforcingfunctionsusershallucinationshuman-aiquality
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate the impact of hallucinations and Cognitive Forcing Functions in human-AI collaborative content-grounded data generation, focusing on the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) to assist in generating high quality conversational data. Through a study with 34 users who each completed 8 tasks (n=272), we found that hallucinations significantly reduce data quality. While Cognitive Forcing Functions do not always alleviate these effects, their presence influences how users integrate AI responses. Specifically, we observed emerging reliance behaviors, with users often appending AI-generated responses to their correct answers, even when the AI's suggestions conflicted. This points to a potential drawback of Cognitive Forcing Functions, particularly when AI suggestions are inaccurate. Users who overrelied on AI-generated text produced lower quality data, emphasizing the nuanced dynamics of overreliance in human-LLM collaboration compared to traditional human-AI decision-making.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Engaging with AI: How Interface Design Shapes Human-AI Collaboration in High-Stakes Decision-Making

    cs.HC 2025-01 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    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.

  2. A Comprehensive Survey of Deep Research: Systems, Methodologies, and Applications

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey of 80+ Deep Research systems that proposes a four-layer taxonomy (foundation models, tool use, planning, synthesis) and compares commercial and open-source implementations.

Pith tools