The DOI matches its Crossref record; 114 of the 116 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Manipulating and Measuring Model Interpretability
Open accessAbstract
With machine learning models being increasingly used to aid decision making even in high-stakes domains, there has been a growing interest in developing interpretable models. Although many supposedly interpretable models have been proposed, there have been relatively few experimental studies investigating whether these models achieve their intended effects, such as making people more closely follow a model’s predictions when it is beneficial for them to do so or enabling them to detect when a model has made a mistake. We present a sequence of pre-registered experiments (N = 3, 800) in which we showed participants functionally identical models that varied only in two factors commonly thought to make machine learning models more or less interpretable: the number of features and the transparency of the model (i.e., whether the model internals are clear or black box). Predictably, participants who saw a clear model with few features could better simulate the model’s predictions. However, we did not find that participants more closely followed its predictions. Furthermore, showing participants a clear model meant that they were less able to detect and correct for the model’s sizable mistakes, seemingly due to information overload. These counterintuitive findings emphasize the importance of testing over intuition when developing interpretable models.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Some researchers measure subjective trust using questionnaires, while others measure objective trust related behavior such as reliance.”
From Exploring the effects of human-centered AI explanations on trust and reliance (2023) · cites this paper as Poursabzi-Sangdeh et al., 2021
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“While WOA has been used in the past by researchers in XAI as an alternative trust measurement (Logg et al., 2019; Mucha et al., 2021; Poursabzi-Sangdeh et al., 2021), it has never been explicitly referred to as reliance and thus clearly differentiated from trust to the best of our knowledge.”
From Exploring the effects of human-centered AI explanations on trust and reliance (2023) · cites this paper as Poursabzi-Sangdeh et al., 2021
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, across many domains, empirical studies of explanations have produced mixed results [4,11,49,53,58,68,82,87], with some suggesting that explanations increase decisionmakers' tendency to rely on AI predictions even when the AI system is wrong [4,68,82,87]-a phenomenon often referred to as overreliance [10,78].”
From Understanding the Role of Human Intuition on Reliance in Human-AI Decision-Making with Explanations (2023) · cites this paper as [68]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“On the contrary, several studies found that showing feature-based explanations increases people's tendency to over-rely on the model when it is wrong, compared to showing only the AI predictions [4,68,82,87].”
From Understanding the Role of Human Intuition on Reliance in Human-AI Decision-Making with Explanations (2023) · cites this paper as [68]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Such explanations often do not match the end-users' mental models [56], making the explanations ineective [2,40,65] and at times even harmful [13,28,30,47,51].”
From Being Trustworthy is Not Enough: How Untrustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI) Can Deceive the End-Users and Gain Their Trust (2023) · cites this paper as [40]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Work in the human–computer interaction community has identified that increased transparency can hamper users’ ability to detect sizable model errors and correct for them, “seemingly due to information overload””
From The false hope of current approaches to explainable artificial intelligence in health care (2021) · cites this paper as [15]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“and evidence suggests models that use explainability techniques can hamper people's ability to detect when a model makes serious mistakes”
From The false hope of current approaches to explainable artificial intelligence in health care (2021) · cites this paper as [15]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, many empirical studies on human-AI decision-making did not observe complementary performance [6,16,37,52,58,61,68,82,84,87].”
From Understanding the Role of Human Intuition on Reliance in Human-AI Decision-Making with Explanations (2023) · cites this paper as [68]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“naive application of existing XAI methods may be ineective [2,40,65] to broader audience of end-users, if not harmful [28,47,49,51].”
From Being Trustworthy is Not Enough: How Untrustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI) Can Deceive the End-Users and Gain Their Trust (2023) · cites this paper as [40]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“and that providing too much detail may reduce user performance due to information overload [44].”
From Explainable AI in hospital clinical decision support systems: A scoping review of healthcare professionals’ perspectives (2026) · cites this paper as [44]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“a study by Poursabzi-Sangdeh et al. [48] found that more 'clear' models can actually lead to information overload and hinder people's ability to detect AI errors.”
From Improving Human-AI Collaboration With Descriptions of AI Behavior (2023) · cites this paper as Poursabzi-Sangdeh et al. [48]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, they choose to use the task of real estate valuation, and how it relates to a decision and an outcome of interest and the utility of explanations in achieving that goal was not established.”
From Explainable machine learning for public policy: Use cases, gaps, and research directions (2023) · cites this paper as Poursabzi-Sangdeh et al. (2021)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Algorithmic transparency similarly reduces people's ability to detect and correct model errors”
From The flaws of policies requiring human oversight of government algorithms (2022) · cites this paper as Poursabzi-Sangdeh et al., 2021
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“The complexity of tasks plays a signifcant role in determining the degree of reliance on AI advice, consistent with the fndings of [9, 105].”
From Dealing with Uncertainty: Understanding the Impact of Prognostic Versus Diagnostic Tasks on Trust and Reliance in Human-AI Decision Making (2024) · cites this paper as [105]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Many studies have found that cognitive biases (particularly anchoring bias and automation bias more broadly) can lead users to misunderstand model behavior and place unwarranted trust in AI systems [20, 34, 52, 55].”
From Interactive Model Cards: A Human-Centered Approach to Model Documentation (2022) · cites this paper as [55]
In the citing paper
“Previous works show that the availability of AI's explanations, regardless of their correctness, is likely to increase people's trust in AI [6,54,81,100].”
From Who Should I Trust: AI or Myself? Leveraging Human and AI Correctness Likelihood to Promote Appropriate Trust in AI-Assisted Decision-Making (2023) · cites this paper as [81]
In the citing paper
“Many studies have investigated the role of AI in assisting humans in making individual decisions [9,16,36, 37, 50, 51, 55, 58, 69, 83, 84, 89], e.g., predicting whether a person will recidivate in the near future.”
From Human-AI Collaboration via Conditional Delegation: A Case Study of Content Moderation (2022) · cites this paper as [69]
In the citing paper
“However, recent research has shown that the recommendation-driven explainable/interpretable AI has little effect on decision making [1, 6-8, 28, 32], although this is not always the case [22,23,41].”
From Explainable AI is Dead, Long Live Explainable AI!: Hypothesis-driven Decision Support using Evaluative AI (2023) · cites this paper as [32]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01 · Cited by 86,835
Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python
Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Müller, A., Nothman, J., Louppe, G., et al. (2012) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1201.0490 · Cited by 71,016
A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions
Lundberg, S., & Lee, S.-I. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1705.07874 · Cited by 23,707
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
Classification and Regression Trees.
Ryzin, J. V., Breiman, L., Friedman, J. H., Olshen, R. A., & Stone, C. J. (1986) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2288003 · Cited by 21,030
"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier
Ribeiro, M. T., Singh, S., & Guestrin, C. (2016) · Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining · doi:10.1145/2939672.2939778 · Cited by 17,555
Gauriat, C.-M., Pencolé, Y., Ribot, P., et al. (2024) · HAL · doi:10.4230/oasics.dx.2024.27 · Cited by 12,623
Rudin, C. (2019) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-019-0048-x · Cited by 10,561
Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A New Source of Inexpensive, Yet High-Quality, Data?
Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691610393980 · Cited by 9,996
Lipton, Z. C. (2018) · Queue · doi:10.1145/3236386.3241340 · Cited by 5,427
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Julia Angwin, Jeff Larson, Surya Mattu, and Lauren Kirchner. 2016. Machine bias: There’s software used across the country to predict future criminals. And it’s biased against blacks. ProPublica (2016).
- 10.2139/ssrn.3465622 · DOI · Paper page
- Philip Johnson-Laird. 1983. Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness. Cambridge University Press.
- Jongbin Jung, Connor Concannon, Ravi Shroff, Sharad Goel, and Daniel G Goldstein. 2020. Simple rules to guide expert classifications. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) (2020).
- 10.5555/3305381.3305576 · DOI
- Zachary C Lipton. 2016. The mythos of model interpretability. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.03490(2016). · arXiv
- Jennifer M. Logg. 2017. Theory of Machine: When Do People Rely on Algorithms? (2017). Harvard Business School NOM Unit Working Paper No. 17-086.
- 10.18574/nyu/9781479833641.001.0001 · DOI
- Don A. Norman. 1987. Some Observations on Mental Models. In Human-Computer Interaction: A Multidisciplinary Approach, R. M. Baecker and W. A. S. Buxton (Eds.). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 241–244.
- Christian Rudder. 2014. Dataclysm: Love, Sex, Race, and Identity–What Our Online Lives Tell Us about Our Offline Selves. Crown.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 501–600 of 718
The Role of Explainability In AI-Driven Financial Decision Making
Ioannou, A., Tavalaei, M. M., Vatn, D. M. K., & Mikalef, P. (2026) · Information Systems Frontiers · doi:10.1007/s10796-026-10727-1 · Cited by 5
Ragone, G., Buono, P., Good, J., & Lanzilotti, R. (2026) · International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3790765 · Cited by 5
Erlei, A., Cau, F. M., Georgiev, R., Kumar, S. C., Bizer, K., & Gadiraju, U. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791420 · Cited by 7
HIEF: a holistic interpretability and explainability framework
Kucklick, J.-P. (2023) · Journal of Decision System · doi:10.1080/12460125.2023.2207268 · Cited by 6
Towards Explainable Automatic Knowledge Graph Construction with Human-in-the-Loop
Zhang, B., Meroño-Peñuela, A., & Simperl, E. P. B. (2023) · Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications · doi:10.3233/faia230091 · Cited by 4
Understanding Interpretability in Modeling Biotechnological Processes: A Critical Review
Aguirre-Zapata, E., Álvarez, H., Lema-Pérez, L., di Sciascio, F. A., & Amicarelli, A. (2023) · Workshop on Information Processing and Control · doi:10.1109/rpic59053.2023.10530792 · Cited by 3
How informative is your XAI? Assessing the quality of explanations through information power
Matarese, M., Rea, F., Rohlfing, K. J., & Sciutti, A. (2025) · Frontiers in Computer Science · doi:10.3389/fcomp.2024.1412341 · Cited by 3
eXING-IoT conceptual framework for explainability integration in next generation-IoT
Vultureanu‐Albişi, A., Bădică, C., & Ivanović, M. D. (2025) · Connection Science · doi:10.1080/09540091.2025.2507180 · Cited by 5
Abi, R. (2025) · International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews · doi:10.55248/gengpi.6.0625.2126 · Cited by 3
Fdez-Sánchez, J. A., Pascual-Triana, J. D., Fernández, A., & Herrera, F. (2021) · Neurocomputing · doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2021.07.097 · Cited by 3
An Experimental Method for Studying Complex Choices
Gurney, N., King, T., & Miller, J. H. (2022) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-19679-9_6 · Cited by 3
Artificial Intelligence and Sentencing from a Human Rights Perspective
Kaspar, J., Harrendorf, S., Butz, F., Höffler, K., Sommerer, L. M., & Christoph, S. (2023) · Critical criminological perspectives · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-19149-7_1 · Cited by 6
Human-Centered Evaluation of Explanations in AI-Assisted Decision-Making
Wang, X. (2024) · ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) · doi:10.1145/3640544.3645239 · Cited by 4
SNIPPET: A Framework for Subjective Evaluation of Visual Explanations Applied to DeepFake Detection
Yang, Y., Joukovsky, B., Jose Oramas, M., Tuytelaars, T., & Deligiannis, N. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing Communications and Applications · doi:10.1145/3665248 · Cited by 4
Aggregated Attributions for Explanatory Analysis of 3D Segmentation Models
Chrabaszcz, M., Baniecki, H., Komorowski, P., Płotka, S., & Biecek, P. (2025) · IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision · doi:10.1109/wacv61041.2025.00026 · Cited by 3
A Minimalist Account of the Right To Explanation
Grote, T., & Paulo, N. (2025) · Philosophy & Technology · doi:10.1007/s13347-025-00888-3 · Cited by 4
Building Human-AI Reliance Through Cognitive Engagement and Exploratory AI Assistance
Raees, M., Khan, V.-J., & Papangelis, K. (2025) · ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization (UMAP) · doi:10.1145/3708319.3734171 · Cited by 5
Modeling Disclosive Transparency in NLP Application Descriptions
Saxon, M., Levy, S., Wang, X., Albalak, A., & Wang, W. Y. (2021) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.153 · Cited by 3
A Model for the Progressive Visualization of Multidimensional Data Structure
Ventocilla, E., & Riveiro, M. (2020) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-41590-7_9 · Cited by 3
Personal insights for altering decisions of tree-based ensembles over time
Boer, N., Deutch, D., Frost, N., & Milo, T. (2020) · Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment · doi:10.14778/3380750.3380752 · Cited by 3
Paulus, D., de Vries, G., & de Walle, B. V. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1911.04787 · Cited by 5
Evaluating Neural Machine Comprehension Model Robustness to Noisy Inputs and Adversarial AttacksPreprint
Wu, W. M. C., Arendt, D., & Volkova, S. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.00190 · Cited by 3
Knowing What VQA Does Not: Pointing to Error-Inducing Regions to Improve Explanation Helpfulness.Preprint
Ray, A., Cogswell, M., Lin, X., Alipour, K., Divakaran, A., Yao, Y., & Burachas, G. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · Cited by 3
LEx: A Framework for Operationalising Layers of Machine Learning ExplanationsPreprint
Singh, R., Ehsan, U., Cheong, M., Riedl, M. O., & Miller, T. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.09612 · Cited by 5
Amortized Generation of Sequential Counterfactual Explanations for Black-box Models.Preprint
Verma, S., Hines, K., & Dickerson, J. P. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · Cited by 3
Smart Contracts, Real-Virtual World Convergence and Economic ImplicationsPreprint
Lehr, W. H. (2021) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3898129 · Cited by 3
Explanations, Fairness, and Appropriate Reliance in Human-AI Decision-MakingPreprint
Schoeffer, J., De‐Arteaga, M., & Kuehl, N. (2022) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2209.11812 · Cited by 3
Omeiza, D., Bhattacharyya, R., Jirotka, M. D., Hawes, N., & Kunze, L. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4898206 · Cited by 3
REFRESH: Responsible and Efficient Feature Reselection guided by SHAP values
Sharma, S., Dutta, S., Albini, E., Lécué, F., Magazzeni, D., & Veloso, M. (2023) · Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society · doi:10.1145/3600211.3604706 · Cited by 4
Industrial Maturity of Machine Learning Solutions Within the Food Industry
Gradl, L., Reis, L., & Buettner, R. (2025) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3558091 · Cited by 2
West, J., Çağıltay, B., Zhang, S., Li, J., Fawaz, K., & Banerjee, S. (2025) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3706598.3713256 · Cited by 2
Faster Information for Effective Long-Term Discharge: A Field Study in Adult Foster Care
Bartle, V., Shearer, A., Wroe, A., Dell, N. L., & Garg, N. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3710983 · Cited by 2
Amine, J. M., & Mourad, M. (2025) · Current Alzheimer Research · doi:10.2174/0115672050401817250721190509 · Cited by 2
Kaufman, Z., Endres, M., Xiong, C., & Brun, Y. (2025) · IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2025.3634245 · Cited by 3
Setty, R., Elovici, Y., & Schwartz, D. (2026) · Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance · doi:10.1016/j.jbef.2026.101148 · Cited by 2
Korosec-Serfaty, M., Léger, P., Parent‐Rocheleau, X., & Sénécal, S. (2026) · Information Systems Frontiers · doi:10.1007/s10796-025-10691-2 · Cited by 4
Kuang, Y., Cheng, X., & Cai, Y. (2026) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2026.103300 · Cited by 5
How AI-Assisted Decision-Making Paradigms and Explainability Shape Human-AI Collaboration
Wang, Y., Ni, Q., Wei, T., Xu, H., Liu, L., & He, L. (2026) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su18073516 · Cited by 5
Lu, X., Ju, K. P., Dudley, M., Sano, L., & Wang, X. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791121 · Cited by 4
Reinhard, P., Li, M. M., Peters, C., & Leimeister, J. M. (2026) · Information Systems Frontiers · doi:10.1007/s10796-026-10716-4 · Cited by 7
Model Transparency: Why Do We Care?
Papantonis, I., & Belle, V. (2023) · International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence (ICAART) · doi:10.5220/0011726300003393 · Cited by 2
Enhancing Robot Explainability in Human-Robot Collaboration
Wang, Y., & You, S. (2023) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-35602-5_17 · Cited by 2
(De)Noise: Moderating the Inconsistency Between Human Decision-Makers
Grgić-Hlača, N., Ali, J., Gummadi, K. P., & Vaughan, J. W. (2024) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3686987 · Cited by 2
Neurosurgery, Explainable AI, and Legal Liability
Matulionytė, R., Molina, E. S., & Ieva, A. D. (2024) · Advances in experimental medicine and biology · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-64892-2_34 · Cited by 2
Bhattacharya, A., Eugenio, B. D., Grosso, V., Johnson, A. E., Tabalba, R., Kirshenbaum, N., Leigh, J., & Zellner, M. (2024) · Statistical Analysis and Data Mining The ASA Data Science Journal · doi:10.1002/sam.11714 · Cited by 2
STRIFE: A Socio-Technical Framework for Threat Modeling of Artificial Intelligence Systems
Parthasarathy, R., Rangarajan, A., Ghatak, S., & Bingi, P. (2025) · International Journal of Intelligent Information Technologies · doi:10.4018/ijiit.370967 · Cited by 2
He, T., Xiao, P., Li, D., Qu, B., & Zhou, R. (2025) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry C · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.5c01750 · Cited by 2
The Influence of Explainability on Stakeholder Trust in AI-Based Credit Risk Assessment Tools
Nagaraj, S. K. S. (2024) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Data Science and Machine Learning · doi:10.63282/3050-9262.ijaidsml-v5i3p110 · Cited by 2
Human-Centered Explainable AI (XAI)
Liao, Q. V., & Varshney, K. R. (2026) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108872225.011 · Cited by 448
Sovrano, F., & Vitali, F. (2023) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-44064-9_2 · Cited by 4
Chy, M. T. I. (2024) · American Journal of Advanced Technology and Engineering Solutions · doi:10.63125/kwfvzw68 · Cited by 15
Interpretable Question Answering on Knowledge Bases and TextPreprint
Sydorova, A., Poerner, N., & Roth, B. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1906.10924 · Cited by 2
Interpretable Few-Shot Learning via Linear DistillationPreprint
Asadulaev, A., Kuznetsov, I. A., & Filchenkov, A. A. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1906.05431 · Cited by 2
Abstraction, Validation, and Generalization for Explainable Artificial IntelligencePreprint
Yang, S. C., Folke, T., & Shafto, P. (2021) · doi:10.22541/au.162316990.08773187/v1 · Cited by 2
A Turing Test for TransparencyPreprint
Bießmann, F., & Treu, V. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2106.11394 · Cited by 8
Rebitschek, F. G., Gigerenzer, G., & Wagner, G. G. (2021) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/kq8ra · Cited by 2
AI Reliance and Decision Quality: Fundamentals, Interdependence, and the Effects of InterventionsPreprint
Schoeffer, J., Jakubik, J., Vössing, M., Kühl, N., & Satzger, G. (2024) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/cekm9 · Cited by 2
Essays on Technology Paternalism : Paternalistic Effects of Smart Technologies on User Behavior
Rochi, M. (2024) · doi:10.20378/irb-98474 · Cited by 2
Radiologist’s Role in Artificial Intelligence Era
Limchareon, S., Kongpromsuk, S., Klinwichit, P., & On-uean, A. (2022) · Siriraj Medical Journal/San Sirirat · doi:10.33192/smj.2022.104 · Cited by 1
Towards Understanding Human-AI Reliance Patterns Through Explanation Styles
Casolin, E. R., & Salim, F. D. (2024) · ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp) · doi:10.1145/3675094.3678996 · Cited by 2
Faithfulness of Local Explanations for Tree-Based Ensemble Models
Rahnama, A. H. A., Geurts, P., & Boström, H. (2025) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-78980-9_2 · Cited by 1
Liang, Y., Collaris, D., Willemsen, M. C., & van Wijk, J. J. (2025) · ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) · doi:10.1145/3708359.3712155 · Cited by 1
HEPHA: A Mixed-Initiative Image Labeling Tool for Specialized Domains
Zhou, S., Li, B., Chen, X., Tu, Z., Wang, Y., Xiang, Y., & Zhang, T. (2025) · ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) · doi:10.1145/3708359.3712072 · Cited by 1
Towards Transparent Deep Learning: Assessing Model Accuracy and Interpretability in CNNs
Singh, S. R., & Ahuja, N. J. (2025) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2025.04.629 · Cited by 1
Improving the Transparency of Robot Policies Using Demonstrations and Reward Communication
Lee, M. S., Simmons, R. G., & Admoni, H. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction · doi:10.1145/3743150 · Cited by 1
Improving Tactical Decision-Making Through Multiobjective Contrastive Explanations
Blom, M. L., Singh, R., Miller, T., Sonenberg, L., Trentelman, K., Saulwick, A., & Wark, S. (2025) · IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems · doi:10.1109/thms.2025.3591163 · Cited by 1
Do You “Trust” This Visualization? An Inventory to Measure Trust in Visualizations
Wang, H., Lin, K., Cohen, A. L., Kennedy, R., Zwald, Z., Nobre, C., & Xiong, C. (2025) · IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2025.3646847 · Cited by 1
Human-Centered AI in Healthcare
Majumder, N. N., & Adebiyi, B. O. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-8440-0_112-1 · Cited by 1
Zadok, M., Peled-Cohen, L., Calderon, N., Gonen, H., Beeri, M. S., & Reichart, R. (2026) · Alzheimer s & Dementia Diagnosis Assessment & Disease Monitoring · doi:10.1002/dad2.70248 · Cited by 1
Anik, A. I., & Bunt, A. (2026) · ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) · doi:10.1145/3742413.3789087 · Cited by 2
(608493), Y. Z., Chen, H., Liu, Y., Liu, J., Qiu, F., Guo, X., Huang, Z., & Wang, Z. (2026) · Journal of Innovative Optical Health Sciences · doi:10.1142/s1793545826500094 · Cited by 1
Introducing Social Explainable AI
Rohlfing, K. J., & Lim, B. Y. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-96-5290-7_1 · Cited by 2
When to Explain: Modeling User Need for Explanations in Real-World Autonomous Driving
Ling, S., Ding, Y., Liu, Y., Wan, Y. F., Jia, X., & Du, N. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791778 · Cited by 1
Co-Disclosing the Computer: LLM-Mediated Computing through Reflective Conversation
Rost, M. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791769 · Cited by 3
AI-Enhanced Strategies for Energy-Efficient Urban Environments
Supto, S. T. J., & Ridoy, M. N. (2026) · doi:10.3390/engproc2026138004 · Cited by 1
Farag, M. I. H. (2026) · Applied Decision Analytics · doi:10.66972/ada21202626 · Cited by 1
Manipulation-Robust Prediction
Björkegren, D., Blumenstock, J. E., & Knight, S. (2026) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.20241087 · Cited by 1
Clement, J. D., Ren, Y., & Curley, S. P. (2026) · Medical Decision Making · doi:10.1177/0272989x261484927 · Cited by 1
A Human-Centered Interpretability Framework Based on Weight of Evidence.
Alvarez-Melis, D., Kaur, H., Daumé, H., Wallach, H., & Vaughan, J. W. (2021) · Cited by 1
Self-citationExploring Ranked Local Selectors for Stable Explanations of ML Models
Korhonen, T., & Garcia, J. (2021) · International Conference on Intelligent Data Science Technologies and Applications (IDSTA) · doi:10.1109/idsta53674.2021.9660809 · Cited by 1
Explainable AI im Gesundheitswesen
Steinwendner, J. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-33597-7_36 · Cited by 2
Graham, S. S. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197644461.003.0005 · Cited by 1
Connecting sensitivity, identifiability and interpretability of a glucose minimal model
Lema-Pérez, L., Aguirre-Zapata, E., Fougner, A. L., Amicarelli, A., & Álvarez, H. (2023) · Workshop on Information Processing and Control · doi:10.1109/rpic59053.2023.10530857 · Cited by 1
“DecisionTime”: A Configurable Framework for Reproducible Human-AI Decision-Making Studies
Salimzadeh, S., & Gadiraju, U. (2024) · ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization (UMAP) · doi:10.1145/3631700.3664885 · Cited by 1
TPE-LCE-SHAP: A Hybrid Framework for Assessing Vehicle-Related PM2.5 Concentrations
Almujibah, H. R., Almaliki, A. H., Matara, C. M., Elhassan, A. A. M., Mohamed, K. A. A., Bakri, M., & Khattak, A. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3505116 · Cited by 1
Khasawneh, T., & Azzeh, M. (2024) · International Journal of Data Science and Analytics · doi:10.1007/s41060-024-00687-7 · Cited by 1
Securing the Future: Addressing Risks and Vulnerabilities in Generative AI for Fintech
Bansal, D., & Tandon, N. (2025) · Information systems engineering and management · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-76957-3_14 · Cited by 1
The Double-Edged Sword of Behavioral Responses in Strategic Classification: Theory and User Studies
Ebrahimi, R., Vaccaro, K., & Naghizadeh, P. (2025) · ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT) · doi:10.1145/3715275.3732056 · Cited by 6
Linearly-interpretable concept embedding models for text analysis
Santis, F. D., Bich, P., Ciravegna, G., Barbiero, P., Giordano, D., & Cerquitelli, T. (2025) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/s10994-025-06839-5 · Cited by 1
An Uninterpretable Right: Legal and Practical Limits of the Right to an Explanation
Engelfriet, A. (2025) · International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) · doi:10.1109/ijcnn64981.2025.11227396 · Cited by 1
Walk the Talk: Is Your Log-based Software Reliability Maintenance System Really Reliable?
He, M., Jia, T., Duan, C., Xiao, P., Zhang, L., Wang, K., Wu, Y., Li, Y., & Huang, G. (2025) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE) · doi:10.1109/ase63991.2025.00316 · Cited by 2
Glenski, M., Ayton, E., Cosbey, R., Arendt, D., & Volkova, S. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.11761 · Cited by 3
Krämer, N. C., Wischnewski, M., & Müller, E. (2023) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/h32ze · Cited by 2
On Prediction-Modelers and Decision-Makers: Why Fairness Requires More Than a Fair Prediction ModelPreprint
Scantamburlo, T., Baumann, J., & Heitz, C. (2023) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.05598 · Cited by 2
GPT-4V exhibits human-like performance in biomedical image classificationPreprint
Ji, Z., & Hou, W. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3826740/v1 · Cited by 1
Supporting Information Integration in Human-AI Augmentation via Reflection on UnobservablesPreprint
De‐Arteaga, M., & Holstein, K. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4884604 · Cited by 1
Developing Explainable AI Methods for Predictive Analytics and Prognostics
Alomari, Y. (2025) · Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem · doi:10.15476/elte.2024.388 · Cited by 1
Bohlen, L., Rosenberger, J., Hambauer, N., Zähringer, D., Franz, V., Zschech, P., & Kraus, M. (2026) · Health Care Management Science · doi:10.1007/s10729-026-09760-y
“The first approach involves limiting model complexity through various constraints such as sparsity, linearity, or additivity [67 ].”
L'acte administratif algorithmique
Stepanov, A. (2026) · doi:10.70675/adc05be3za62ez4b4fz81e7zabf744e60dbf
Metadata
- Authors
- Poursabzi-Sangdeh, F., Goldstein, D. G., Hofman, J. M., Wortman Vaughan, J. W., & Wallach, H.
- Affiliations
- Microsoft (United States) (US)
- Microsoft Research, United States
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2021-05-06
- Pages
- 1-52
- OpenAlex
- W2788362053
- Semantic Scholar
- 2f4e42ab1368b83e38e3011fcec4edb57267b5d2
- Cited by
- 728
- References
- 116
- Citations by year
- 2026: 94 · 2025: 97 · 2024: 118 · 2023: 106 · 2022: 111 · 2021: 90
- FWCI
- 48.67
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- model interpretability, explainable AI, black-box models, model transparency, feature count, error detection, information overload, trust in machine learning, pre-registered experiment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
