Imperfectly Cooperative Human-AI Interactions: Comparing the Impacts of Human and AI Attributes in Simulated and User Studies

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.15607v1
• Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2026 01:10:34 GMT
• Title: Imperfectly Cooperative Human-AI Interactions: Comparing the Impacts of Human and AI Attributes in Simulated and User Studies
• Abstract summary: AI design characteristics and human personality traits each impact the quality and outcomes of human-AI interactions.<n>This study compares a purely simulated dataset comprising 2,000 simulations and a parallel human subjects experiment involving 290 human participants.<n>Results reveal divergences between purely simulated and human study datasets, and between scenario types.
• Score: 25.913918889459552
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: AI design characteristics and human personality traits each impact the quality and outcomes of human-AI interactions. However, their relative and joint impacts are underexplored in imperfectly cooperative scenarios, where people and AI only have partially aligned goals and objectives. This study compares a purely simulated dataset comprising 2,000 simulations and a parallel human subjects experiment involving 290 human participants to investigate these effects across two scenario categories: (1) hiring negotiations between human job candidates and AI hiring agents; and (2) human-AI transactions wherein AI agents may conceal information to maximize internal goals. We examine user Extraversion and Agreeableness alongside AI design characteristics, including Adaptability, Expertise, and chain-of-thought Transparency. Our causal discovery analysis extends performance-focused evaluations by integrating scenario-based outcomes, communication analysis, and questionnaire measures. Results reveal divergences between purely simulated and human study datasets, and between scenario types. In simulation experiments, personality traits and AI attributes were comparatively influential. Yet, with actual human subjects, AI attributes -- particularly transparency -- were much more impactful. We discuss how these divergences vary across different interaction contexts, offering crucial insights for the future of human-centered AI agents.

Related papers

• Human-Data Interaction, Exploration, and Visualization in the AI Era: Challenges and Opportunities [34.82163910275556]
  The rapid advancement of AI is transforming human-centered systems.<n>This paper investigates the challenges introduced by recent advances in AI and examines how these developments are reshaping the ways users engage with data.<n>It outlines limitations and open research directions for building human-centered AI systems for interactive data analysis in the AI era.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-04T14:18:17Z)
• Causal Effects with Unobserved Unit Types in Interacting Human-AI Systems [8.500597009666526]
  We study experiments on interacting populations of humans and AI agents, where both unit types and the interaction network remain unobserved.<n>We assume a human-AI prior that gives each unit a probability of being human.<n>We then model outcome dynamics through a causal message passing framework and analyze sample-mean outcomes across subpopulations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T00:31:48Z)
• HHI-Assist: A Dataset and Benchmark of Human-Human Interaction in Physical Assistance Scenario [63.77482302352545]
  HHI-Assist is a dataset comprising motion capture clips of human-human interactions in assistive tasks.<n>Our work has the potential to significantly enhance robotic assistance policies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-12T09:38:17Z)
• Exploring Big Five Personality and AI Capability Effects in LLM-Simulated Negotiation Dialogues [16.07828032939124]
  This paper presents an evaluation framework for agentic AI systems in mission-critical negotiation contexts.<n>Using Sotopia as a simulation testbed, we present two experiments that systematically evaluated how personality traits and AI agent characteristics influence social negotiation outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-19T00:14:56Z)
• When Models Know More Than They Can Explain: Quantifying Knowledge Transfer in Human-AI Collaboration [79.69935257008467]
  We introduce Knowledge Integration and Transfer Evaluation (KITE), a conceptual and experimental framework for Human-AI knowledge transfer capabilities.<n>We conduct the first large-scale human study (N=118) explicitly designed to measure it.<n>In our two-phase setup, humans first ideate with an AI on problem-solving strategies, then independently implement solutions, isolating model explanations' influence on human understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T20:48:16Z)
• When Trust Collides: Decoding Human-LLM Cooperation Dynamics through the Prisoner's Dilemma [10.143277649817096]
  This study investigates human cooperative attitudes and behaviors toward large language models (LLMs) agents.<n>Results revealed significant effects of declared agent identity on most cooperation-related behaviors.<n>These findings contribute to our understanding of human adaptation in competitive cooperation with autonomous agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-10T13:37:36Z)
• How Performance Pressure Influences AI-Assisted Decision Making [52.997197698288936]
  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)
• Inter-X: Towards Versatile Human-Human Interaction Analysis [100.254438708001]
  We propose Inter-X, a dataset with accurate body movements and diverse interaction patterns. The dataset includes 11K interaction sequences and more than 8.1M frames. We also equip Inter-X with versatile annotations of more than 34K fine-grained human part-level textual descriptions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-26T13:36:05Z)
• Human-AI Coevolution [48.74579595505374]
  Coevolution AI is a process in which humans and AI algorithms continuously influence each other. This paper introduces Coevolution AI as the cornerstone for a new field of study at the intersection between AI and complexity science.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-23T18:10:54Z)
• Co-Located Human-Human Interaction Analysis using Nonverbal Cues: A Survey [71.43956423427397]
  We aim to identify the nonverbal cues and computational methodologies resulting in effective performance. This survey differs from its counterparts by involving the widest spectrum of social phenomena and interaction settings. Some major observations are: the most often used nonverbal cue, computational method, interaction environment, and sensing approach are speaking activity, support vector machines, and meetings composed of 3-4 persons equipped with microphones and cameras, respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-20T13:37:57Z)
• Investigations of Performance and Bias in Human-AI Teamwork in Hiring [30.046502708053097]
  In AI-assisted decision-making, effective hybrid teamwork (human-AI) is not solely dependent on AI performance alone. We investigate how both a model's predictive performance and bias may transfer to humans in a recommendation-aided decision task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-21T17:58:07Z)
• Understanding the Effect of Out-of-distribution Examples and Interactive Explanations on Human-AI Decision Making [19.157591744997355]
  We argue that the typical experimental setup limits the potential of human-AI teams. We develop novel interfaces to support interactive explanations so that humans can actively engage with AI assistance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-13T19:01:32Z)

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.