Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Impact Of Explainable AI On Cognitive Load: Insights From An Empirical Study

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 2304.08861 v1 pith:44IBQHMK submitted 2023-04-18 cs.AI cs.HC

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

While the emerging research field of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) claims to address the lack of explainability in high-performance machine learning models, in practice, XAI targets developers rather than actual end-users. Unsurprisingly, end-users are often unwilling to use XAI-based decision support systems. Similarly, there is limited interdisciplinary research on end-users' behavior during XAI explanations usage, rendering it unknown how explanations may impact cognitive load and further affect end-user performance. Therefore, we conducted an empirical study with 271 prospective physicians, measuring their cognitive load, task performance, and task time for distinct implementation-independent XAI explanation types using a COVID-19 use case. We found that these explanation types strongly influence end-users' cognitive load, task performance, and task time. Further, we contextualized a mental efficiency metric, ranking local XAI explanation types best, to provide recommendations for future applications and implications for sociotechnical XAI research.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Explainability and AI Confidence in Clinical Decision Support Systems: Effects on Trust, Diagnostic Performance, and Cognitive Load in Breast Cancer Care

    cs.HC 2025-01 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Low AI confidence reduced clinician trust and agreement and increased decision time, while high confidence corresponded to a small drop in diagnostic accuracy in a 28-participant web experiment.

Pith tools