Human performance effects of combining counterfactual explanations with normative and contrastive explanations in supervised machine learning for automated decision assistance

• Counterfactual explanations gained popularity as a solution for aiding causal understanding and explain the reasons behind machine learning outputs. • Empirical data on the influence of counterfactuals on human decisions is scarce compared to traditional explanation methods. • An experiment analyzed the effects of counterfactual explanations alongside normative and contrastive explanations in condition-based maintenance. • Including counterfactual explanations reduced false alarm rates and potentially decreased decision time and workload. • Caution is advised against overstating the benefits of counterfactuals in digital work environments. Counterfactual explanations have emerged as a popular solution for elucidating the reasons behind machine learning predictions due to their contribution in supporting people's understanding of causality. Despite psychological research suggesting potential burdens associated with counterfactuals, empirical data on the influence of counterfactual explanations on human decisions is limited, especially in comparison with other more traditional explanation methods in machine learning for decision assistance. We present an experiment to examine the human performance effects of counterfactual explanations combined with normative and contrastive explanations in the context of condition-based manteinance. Twenty-four participants provided their diagnosis of the conditions of a hydraulic system with the assistance of a simulated decision aid based on machine learning, under four experimental conditions (baseline with no explanations, normative plus contrastive explanations, normative plus counterfactual explanations, and normative plus contrastive plus counterfactual explanations). The results indicate a lack of significant performance differences between explanation conditions. However, we found a reduction in false alarm rate in the condition with all three explanations, and a potential reduction in decision time and workload in the two conditions that included counterfactual explanations. These findings highlight the potential of counterfactuals to reduce decision time and workload, but they also caution against overestimating their benefits in supporting decision performance within digital work environments.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
Published
2024-12-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103434
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.39

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Human performance effects of combining counterfactual explanations with normative and contrastive explanations in supervised machine learning for automated decision assistance

Greg A. Jamieson, Birsen Donmez, Davide Gentile
4 citations
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
1.39
article

Human performance effects of combining counterfactual explanations with normative and contrastive explanations in supervised machine learning for automated decision assistance

Greg A. Jamieson, Birsen Donmez, Davide Gentile
article en
4 citations

Abstract

• Counterfactual explanations gained popularity as a solution for aiding causal understanding and explain the reasons behind machine learning outputs. • Empirical data on the influence of counterfactuals on human decisions is scarce compared to traditional explanation methods. • An experiment analyzed the effects of counterfactual explanations alongside normative and contrastive explanations in condition-based maintenance. • Including counterfactual explanations reduced false alarm rates and potentially decreased decision time and workload. • Caution is advised against overstating the benefits of counterfactuals in digital work environments. Counterfactual explanations have emerged as a popular solution for elucidating the reasons behind machine learning predictions due to their contribution in supporting people's understanding of causality. Despite psychological research suggesting potential burdens associated with counterfactuals, empirical data on the influence of counterfactual explanations on human decisions is limited, especially in comparison with other more traditional explanation methods in machine learning for decision assistance. We present an experiment to examine the human performance effects of counterfactual explanations combined with normative and contrastive explanations in the context of condition-based manteinance. Twenty-four participants provided their diagnosis of the conditions of a hydraulic system with the assistance of a simulated decision aid based on machine learning, under four experimental conditions (baseline with no explanations, normative plus contrastive explanations, normative plus counterfactual explanations, and normative plus contrastive plus counterfactual explanations). The results indicate a lack of significant performance differences between explanation conditions. However, we found a reduction in false alarm rate in the condition with all three explanations, and a potential reduction in decision time and workload in the two conditions that included counterfactual explanations. These findings highlight the potential of counterfactuals to reduce decision time and workload, but they also caution against overestimating their benefits in supporting decision performance within digital work environments.

International Journal of Human-Computer StudiesVol. 196
University of Toronto (CA)
Mitacs, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
1.39
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.