Explaining AI weaknesses improves human–AI performance in a dynamic control task

AI-based decision support is increasingly implemented to support operators in dynamic control tasks. While these systems continuously improve, to truly achieve human–system synergy, one must also study humans’ system understanding and behavior. Accordingly, we investigated the impact of explainability instructions regarding a specific system weakness on performance and trust in two experiments (with higher task demands in Experiment 2). Participants performed a dynamic control task with support from either an explainable AI (XAI, information on a system weakness), a non-explainable AI (nonXAI, no information on system weakness), or without support (manual, only in Experiment 2). Results show that participants with XAI support outperformed those in the nonXAI group, particularly in situations where the AI actually erred. Notably, informing users of system weaknesses did not affect trust once they had interacted with the system. In addition, Experiment 2 showed the general benefit of decision support over working manually under higher task demands. These findings suggest that AI support can enhance performance in complex tasks and that providing information on potential system weaknesses aids in managing system errors and resource allocation without compromising trust. • Two experiments examined explainable AI in a dynamic supervisory control task. • One group of subjects was informed about AI weaknesses; i.e. where errors can occur. • Explainability improved performance, especially in cases where the AI erred. • Weakness information did not negatively affect trust in the AI after the interaction. • Explaining AI weaknesses enhanced human–AI collaboration without compromising trust.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
Published
2025-03-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2025.103505
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
12.19
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Explaining AI weaknesses improves human–AI performance in a dynamic control task

Eileen Roesler, Tobias Rieger, Linda Onnasch, Hanna Schindler
5 citations
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
12.19
article

Explaining AI weaknesses improves human–AI performance in a dynamic control task

Eileen Roesler, Tobias Rieger, Linda Onnasch, Hanna Schindler
article en
5 citations

Abstract

AI-based decision support is increasingly implemented to support operators in dynamic control tasks. While these systems continuously improve, to truly achieve human–system synergy, one must also study humans’ system understanding and behavior. Accordingly, we investigated the impact of explainability instructions regarding a specific system weakness on performance and trust in two experiments (with higher task demands in Experiment 2). Participants performed a dynamic control task with support from either an explainable AI (XAI, information on a system weakness), a non-explainable AI (nonXAI, no information on system weakness), or without support (manual, only in Experiment 2). Results show that participants with XAI support outperformed those in the nonXAI group, particularly in situations where the AI actually erred. Notably, informing users of system weaknesses did not affect trust once they had interacted with the system. In addition, Experiment 2 showed the general benefit of decision support over working manually under higher task demands. These findings suggest that AI support can enhance performance in complex tasks and that providing information on potential system weaknesses aids in managing system errors and resource allocation without compromising trust. • Two experiments examined explainable AI in a dynamic supervisory control task. • One group of subjects was informed about AI weaknesses; i.e. where errors can occur. • Explainability improved performance, especially in cases where the AI erred. • Weakness information did not negatively affect trust in the AI after the interaction. • Explaining AI weaknesses enhanced human–AI collaboration without compromising trust.

International Journal of Human-Computer StudiesVol. 199
George Mason University (US), Technische Universität Berlin (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
12.19
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.