Evaluating What Others Say: The Effect of Accuracy Assessment in Shaping Mental Models of AI Systems

Forming accurate mental models that align with the actual behavior of an AI system is critical for successful user experience and interactions. One way to develop mental models is through information shared by other users. However, this social information can be inaccurate and there is a lack of research examining whether inaccurate social information influences the development of accurate mental models. To address this gap, our study investigates the impact of social information accuracy on mental models, as well as whether prompting users to validate the social information can mitigate the impact. We conducted a between-subject experiment with 39 crowdworkers where each participant interacted with our AI system that automates a workflow given a natural language sentence. We compared participants' mental models between those exposed to social information of how the AI system worked, both correct and incorrect, versus those who formed mental models through their own usage of the system. Specifically, we designed three experimental conditions: 1) validation condition that presented the social information followed by an opportunity to validate its accuracy through testing example utterances, 2) social information condition that presented the social information only, without the validation opportunity, and 3) control condition that allowed users to interact with the system without any social information. Our results revealed that the inclusion of the validation process had a positive impact on the development of accurate mental models, especially around the knowledge distribution aspect of mental models. Furthermore, participants were more willing to share comments with others when they had the chance to validate the social information. The impact of inaccurate social information on altering user mental models was found to be non-significant, while 69.23% of participants incorrectly judged the social information accuracy at least once. We discuss the implications of these findings for designing tools that support the validation of social information and thereby improve human-AI interactions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Published
2024-11-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3686912
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.69
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating What Others Say: The Effect of Accuracy Assessment in Shaping Mental Models of AI Systems

Hyo Jin, Priyanshu Rai, Michelle Brachman, Qian Pan et al.
2 citations
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
0.69
article

Evaluating What Others Say: The Effect of Accuracy Assessment in Shaping Mental Models of AI Systems

Hyo Jin, Priyanshu Rai, Michelle Brachman, Qian Pan, James M. Johnson, Casey Dugan, Roshni Thawani
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Forming accurate mental models that align with the actual behavior of an AI system is critical for successful user experience and interactions. One way to develop mental models is through information shared by other users. However, this social information can be inaccurate and there is a lack of research examining whether inaccurate social information influences the development of accurate mental models. To address this gap, our study investigates the impact of social information accuracy on mental models, as well as whether prompting users to validate the social information can mitigate the impact. We conducted a between-subject experiment with 39 crowdworkers where each participant interacted with our AI system that automates a workflow given a natural language sentence. We compared participants' mental models between those exposed to social information of how the AI system worked, both correct and incorrect, versus those who formed mental models through their own usage of the system. Specifically, we designed three experimental conditions: 1) validation condition that presented the social information followed by an opportunity to validate its accuracy through testing example utterances, 2) social information condition that presented the social information only, without the validation opportunity, and 3) control condition that allowed users to interact with the system without any social information. Our results revealed that the inclusion of the validation process had a positive impact on the development of accurate mental models, especially around the knowledge distribution aspect of mental models. Furthermore, participants were more willing to share comments with others when they had the chance to validate the social information. The impact of inaccurate social information on altering user mental models was found to be non-significant, while 69.23% of participants incorrectly judged the social information accuracy at least once. We discuss the implications of these findings for designing tools that support the validation of social information and thereby improve human-AI interactions.

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer InteractionVol. 8(CSCW2)
Cambridge Scientific (United States) (US), IBM Research - India (IN), IBM (Canada) (CA)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
0.69
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.