Human-in-the-Loop User Feedback Affects Perceived Accuracy and Trust, but Task Subjectivity Matters

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.17548v1
• Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 04:46:25 GMT
• Title: Human-in-the-Loop User Feedback Affects Perceived Accuracy and Trust, but Task Subjectivity Matters
• Abstract summary: We present three experiments that study the effects of interactive feedback collections on user impressions in domains with objective and subjective feedback.<n>Results show that in a context where there is an objectively correct answer, providing HITL feedback lowered both participants' trust in the system and their perception of system accuracy.<n>These results highlight the importance of considering the effects of allowing different types of end-user feedback on user trust when designing intelligent systems.
• Score: 3.8028536988925477
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: While ML can produce complex models beyond those that a human could produce manually, incorporating human input can often improve performance beyond purely data-driven models. While this feedback could come from system designers or domain experts, in many cases, the end users who regularly use the system will naturally develop an understanding of its flaws and desire the ability to change the system's behavior based on their knowledge. While soliciting feedback from end users can result in significant model improvement over time, introducing these feedback techniques can also affect several human factors-such as trust or perception of system accuracy-that are not yet fully understood and have different effects reported in the existing literature. Therefore, we sought to build on the existing research to further explore how the act of providing feedback can affect user understanding of an intelligent system and its accuracy in different contexts. We present three controlled experiments that study the effects of interactive feedback collections on user impressions in domains with objective and subjective feedback. The results show that in a context where there is an objectively correct answer, providing HITL feedback lowered both participants' trust in the system and their perception of system accuracy, regardless of whether the system accuracy improved in response to their feedback. However, when the feedback being provided involved subjective opinion, no such negative bias was observed. Furthermore, in the objective context, participants distrusted the system over time, whereas participants in the subjective context mistrusted the system over time. These results highlight the importance of considering the effects of allowing different types of end-user feedback on user trust when designing intelligent systems.

Related papers

• User Feedback Provides a Unique Signal that LLMs Can not Detect [25.849928795741672]
  We demonstrate that user feedback is a highly actionable signal for improvement.<n>We show that feedback-informed revisions resolve targeted issues at significantly higher rates than baseline revisions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-02T17:42:44Z)
• Can User Feedback Help Issue Detection? An Empirical Study on a One-billion-user Online Service System [28.43595612060133]
  We conduct an empirical study on 50,378,766 user feedback items from six real-world services in a one-billion-user online service system.<n>Our results show that a large proportion of user feedback provides irrelevant information about system issues.<n>We find severe issues that cannot be easily detected based solely on user feedback characteristics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T12:49:07Z)
• Exploring the Impact of Personality Traits on Conversational Recommender Systems: A Simulation with Large Language Models [70.180385882195]
  This paper introduces a personality-aware user simulation for Conversational Recommender Systems (CRSs)<n>The user agent induces customizable personality traits and preferences, while the system agent possesses the persuasion capability to simulate realistic interaction in CRSs.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that state-of-the-art LLMs can effectively generate diverse user responses aligned with specified personality traits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-09T13:21:17Z)
• Beyond Thumbs Up/Down: Untangling Challenges of Fine-Grained Feedback for Text-to-Image Generation [67.88747330066049]
  Fine-grained feedback captures nuanced distinctions in image quality and prompt-alignment. We show that demonstrating its superiority to coarse-grained feedback is not automatic. We identify key challenges in eliciting and utilizing fine-grained feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T17:19:34Z)
• Rethinking the Evaluation of Dialogue Systems: Effects of User Feedback on Crowdworkers and LLMs [57.16442740983528]
  In ad-hoc retrieval, evaluation relies heavily on user actions, including implicit feedback. The role of user feedback in annotators' assessment of turns in a conversational perception has been little studied. We focus on how the evaluation of task-oriented dialogue systems ( TDSs) is affected by considering user feedback, explicit or implicit, as provided through the follow-up utterance of a turn being evaluated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-19T16:45:50Z)
• RELIC: Investigating Large Language Model Responses using Self-Consistency [58.63436505595177]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are notorious for blending fact with fiction and generating non-factual content, known as hallucinations. We propose an interactive system that helps users gain insight into the reliability of the generated text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-28T14:55:52Z)
• Continually Improving Extractive QA via Human Feedback [59.49549491725224]
  We study continually improving an extractive question answering (QA) system via human user feedback. We conduct experiments involving thousands of user interactions under diverse setups to broaden the understanding of learning from feedback over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-21T14:35:32Z)
• Improving Conversational Question Answering Systems after Deployment using Feedback-Weighted Learning [69.42679922160684]
  We propose feedback-weighted learning based on importance sampling to improve upon an initial supervised system using binary user feedback. Our work opens the prospect to exploit interactions with real users and improve conversational systems after deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-01T19:50:34Z)
• Soliciting Human-in-the-Loop User Feedback for Interactive Machine Learning Reduces User Trust and Impressions of Model Accuracy [8.11839312231511]
  Mixed-initiative systems allow users to interactively provide feedback to improve system performance. Our research investigates how the act of providing feedback can affect user understanding of an intelligent system and its accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-28T16:46:41Z)
• The Role of Domain Expertise in User Trust and the Impact of First Impressions with Intelligent Systems [7.3817525365473875]
  Domain-specific intelligent systems are meant to help system users in their decision-making process. Prior domain knowledge can affect user trust and confidence in detecting system errors. Our research explores the relationship between ordering bias and domain expertise when encountering errors in intelligent systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-20T17:41:02Z)

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.