The Effect of Explainable AI-based Decision Support on Human Task Performance: A Meta-Analysis

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.13858v1
• Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 10:38:43 GMT
• Title: The Effect of Explainable AI-based Decision Support on Human Task Performance: A Meta-Analysis
• Authors: Felix Haag,
• Abstract summary: We conduct a meta-analysis to explore how XAI affects human performance in classification tasks.<n>Our results show an improvement in task performance through XAI-based decision support.<n>The analysis reveals that the studies' risk of bias moderates the effect of explanations in AI, while the explanation type appears to play only a negligible role.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: The desirable properties of explanations in information systems have fueled the demands for transparency in artificial intelligence (AI) outputs. To address these demands, the field of explainable AI (XAI) has put forth methods that can support human decision-making by explaining AI outputs. However, current empirical works present inconsistent findings on whether such explanations help to improve users' task performance in decision support systems (DSS). In this paper, we conduct a meta-analysis to explore how XAI affects human performance in classification tasks. Our results show an improvement in task performance through XAI-based decision support, though explanations themselves are not the decisive driver for this improvement. The analysis reveals that the studies' risk of bias moderates the effect of explanations in AI, while the explanation type appears to play only a negligible role. Our findings contribute to the human computer interaction field by enhancing the understanding of human-XAI collaboration in DSS.

Related papers

• How Performance Pressure Influences AI-Assisted Decision Making [57.53469908423318]
  We show how pressure and explainable AI (XAI) techniques interact with AI advice-taking behavior.<n>Our results show complex interaction effects, with different combinations of pressure and XAI techniques either improving or worsening AI advice taking behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T22:39:52Z)
• Study on the Helpfulness of Explainable Artificial Intelligence [0.0]
  Legal, business, and ethical requirements motivate using effective XAI. We propose to evaluate XAI methods via the user's ability to successfully perform a proxy task. In other words, we address the helpfulness of XAI for human decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T14:03:52Z)
• Combining AI Control Systems and Human Decision Support via Robustness and Criticality [53.10194953873209]
  We extend a methodology for adversarial explanations (AE) to state-of-the-art reinforcement learning frameworks. We show that the learned AI control system demonstrates robustness against adversarial tampering. In a training / learning framework, this technology can improve both the AI's decisions and explanations through human interaction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-03T15:38:57Z)
• Human Delegation Behavior in Human-AI Collaboration: The Effect of Contextual Information [7.475784495279183]
  One promising approach to leverage existing complementary capabilities is allowing humans to delegate individual instances of decision tasks to AI.<n>We conduct a behavioral study to explore the effects of providing contextual information to support this delegation decision.<n>Our findings reveal that access to contextual information significantly improves human-AI team performance in delegation settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-09T18:59:47Z)
• The Impact of Imperfect XAI on Human-AI Decision-Making [8.305869611846775]
  We evaluate how incorrect explanations influence humans' decision-making behavior in a bird species identification task. Our findings reveal the influence of imperfect XAI and humans' level of expertise on their reliance on AI and human-AI team performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-25T15:19:36Z)
• Impact Of Explainable AI On Cognitive Load: Insights From An Empirical Study [0.0]
  This study measures cognitive load, task performance, and task time for 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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-18T09:52:09Z)
• Understanding the Role of Human Intuition on Reliance in Human-AI Decision-Making with Explanations [44.01143305912054]
  We study how decision-makers' intuition affects their use of AI predictions and explanations. Our results identify three types of intuition involved in reasoning about AI predictions and explanations. We use these pathways to explain why feature-based explanations did not improve participants' decision outcomes and increased their overreliance on AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-18T01:33:50Z)
• The Role of AI in Drug Discovery: Challenges, Opportunities, and Strategies [97.5153823429076]
  The benefits, challenges and drawbacks of AI in this field are reviewed. The use of data augmentation, explainable AI, and the integration of AI with traditional experimental methods are also discussed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-08T23:23:39Z)
• Towards Human Cognition Level-based Experiment Design for Counterfactual Explanations (XAI) [68.8204255655161]
  The emphasis of XAI research appears to have turned to a more pragmatic explanation approach for better understanding. An extensive area where cognitive science research may substantially influence XAI advancements is evaluating user knowledge and feedback. We propose a framework to experiment with generating and evaluating the explanations on the grounds of different cognitive levels of understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-31T19:20:22Z)
• A Meta-Analysis on the Utility of Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Human-AI Decision-Making [0.0]
  We present an initial synthesis of existing research on XAI studies using a statistical meta-analysis. We observe a statistically positive impact of XAI on users' performance. We find no effect of explanations on users' performance compared to sole AI predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-10T19:08:10Z)
• Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space [62.997667081978825]
  Counterfactual explanations aim to provide to end users a set of features that need to be changed in order to achieve a desired outcome. Current approaches rarely take into account the feasibility of actions needed to achieve the proposed explanations. We present Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space (CEILS), a methodology to generate counterfactual explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-14T20:48:48Z)
• A general framework for scientifically inspired explanations in AI [76.48625630211943]
  We instantiate the concept of structure of scientific explanation as the theoretical underpinning for a general framework in which explanations for AI systems can be implemented. This framework aims to provide the tools to build a "mental-model" of any AI system so that the interaction with the user can provide information on demand and be closer to the nature of human-made explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-02T10:32:21Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.