The impact of AI errors in a human-in-the-loop process

被引:15
作者
Agudo, Ujue [1 ,2 ]
Liberal, Karlos G. [1 ]
Arrese, Miren [1 ]
Matute, Helena [2 ]
机构
[1] Bikolabs Biko, Pamplona, Spain
[2] Univ Deusto, Dept Psicol, Avda Univ 24, Bilbao 48007, Spain
关键词
Human-computer interaction; Automation bias; AI; Decision-making; Human-in-the-loop; Compliance; Artificial intelligence; BIAS;
D O I
10.1186/s41235-023-00529-3
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Automated decision-making is becoming increasingly common in the public sector. As a result, political institutions recommend the presence of humans in these decision-making processes as a safeguard against potentially erroneous or biased algorithmic decisions. However, the scientific literature on human-in-the-loop performance is not conclusive about the benefits and risks of such human presence, nor does it clarify which aspects of this human-computer interaction may influence the final decision. In two experiments, we simulate an automated decision-making process in which participants judge multiple defendants in relation to various crimes, and we manipulate the time in which participants receive support from a supposed automated system with Artificial Intelligence (before or after they make their judgments). Our results show that human judgment is affected when participants receive incorrect algorithmic support, particularly when they receive it before providing their own judgment, resulting in reduced accuracy. The data and materials for these experiments are freely available at the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/b6p4z/ Experiment 2 was preregistered.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 54 条
[1]   The influence of algorithms on political and dating decisions [J].
Agudo, Ujue ;
Matute, Helena .
PLOS ONE, 2021, 16 (04)
[2]   Human-AI Interactions in Public Sector Decision Making: "Automation Bias" and "Selective Adherence" to Algorithmic Advice [J].
Alon-Barkat, Saar ;
Busuioc, Madalina .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION RESEARCH AND THEORY, 2023, 33 (01) :153-169
[3]  
Alvarez M., 2023, ForenPsy 1.0
[4]  
Angwin Julia., 2016, Machine bias: Risk assessments in criminal sentencing
[5]   In AI we trust? Perceptions about automated decision-making by artificial intelligence [J].
Araujo, Theo ;
Helberger, Natali ;
Kruikemeier, Sanne ;
de Vreese, Claes H. .
AI & SOCIETY, 2020, 35 (03) :611-623
[6]  
Berkman Klein Center, 2022, Risk assessment tool database
[7]   Is that your final decision? Multi-stage profiling, selective effects, and Article 22 of the GDPR [J].
Binns, Reuben ;
Veale, Michael .
INTERNATIONAL DATA PRIVACY LAW, 2021, 11 (04) :319-332
[8]   To Trust or to Think: Cognitive Forcing Functions Can Reduce Overreliance on AI in AI-assisted Decision-making [J].
Buçinca Z. ;
Malaya M.B. ;
Gajos K.Z. .
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 2021, 5 (CSCW1)
[9]  
Capdevila M., 2015, TASA REINCIDENCIA PE
[10]   Using Dreyfus' legacy to understand justice in algorithm-based processes [J].
Casacuberta, David ;
Guersenzvaig, Ariel .
AI & SOCIETY, 2019, 34 (02) :313-319