Skip to main content
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Effects of machine learning errors on human decision-making: manipulations of model accuracy, error types, and error importance

Journal Article · · Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
This study addressed the cognitive impacts of providing correct and incorrect machine learning (ML) outputs in support of an object detection task. The study consisted of five experiments that manipulated the accuracy and importance of mock ML outputs. In each of the experiments, participants were given the T and L task with T-shaped targets and L-shaped distractors. They were tasked with categorizing each image as target present or target absent. In Experiment 1, they performed this task without the aid of ML outputs. In Experiments 2–5, they were shown images with bounding boxes, representing the output of an ML model. The outputs could be correct (hits and correct rejections), or they could be erroneous (false alarms and misses). Experiment 2 manipulated the overall accuracy of these mock ML outputs. Experiment 3 manipulated the proportion of different types of errors. Experiments 4 and 5 manipulated the importance of specific types of stimuli or model errors, as well as the framing of the task in terms of human or model performance. These experiments showed that model misses were consistently harder for participants to detect than model false alarms. In general, as the model’s performance increased, human performance increased as well, but in many cases the participants were more likely to overlook model errors when the model had high accuracy overall. Warning participants to be on the lookout for specific types of model errors had very little impact on their performance. Overall, our results emphasize the importance of considering human cognition when determining what level of model performance and types of model errors are acceptable for a given task.
Research Organization:
Sandia National Laboratories (SNL-NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States)
Sponsoring Organization:
USDOE; USDOE Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program; USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
Grant/Contract Number:
NA0003525
OSTI ID:
2437809
Alternate ID(s):
OSTI ID: 2474792
Report Number(s):
SAND--2024-14429J
Journal Information:
Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, Journal Name: Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications Journal Issue: 1 Vol. 9; ISSN 2365-7464
Publisher:
BioMed CentralCopyright Statement
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English

References (27)

When and Why Might a Computer-aided Detection (CAD) System Interfere with Visual Search? An Eye-tracking Study journal October 2012
Introduction matters: Manipulating trust in automation and reliance in automated driving journal January 2018
Automation bias: Empirical results assessing influencing factors journal May 2014
Reliability of MTurk Data From Masters and Workers journal January 2020
Guided search: An alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. journal January 1989
Effects of response bias and judgment framing on operator use of an automated aid in a target detection task. journal December 2011
Decision processes in visual search as a function of target prevalence. journal January 2016
Rare items often missed in visual searches journal May 2005
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead journal May 2019
A committee of neural networks for traffic sign classification conference July 2011
Prevalence in Visual Search: From the Clinic to the Lab and Back Again journal April 2017
How Much Information? conference May 2016
Intellingo conference April 2018
The Impact of Placebic Explanations on Trust in Intelligent Systems conference May 2019
Effect of Confidence Indicators on Trust in AI-Generated Profiles conference April 2020
Misplaced Trust: Measuring the Interference of Machine Learning in Human Decision-Making conference July 2020
Why do we miss rare targets? Exploring the boundaries of the low prevalence effect journal November 2008
Not All Information Is Equal: Effects of Disclosing Different Types of Likelihood Information on Trust, Compliance and Reliance, and Task Performance in Human-Automation Teaming journal July 2019
Distinction without a difference? An assessment of MTurk Worker types journal January 2020
Automation Reliability in Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Control: A Reliance-Compliance Model of Automation Dependence in High Workload journal September 2006
On the Independence of Compliance and Reliance: Are Automation False Alarms Worse Than Misses? journal August 2007
Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance journal January 2004
Conceptual Issues in the Study of Dynamic Hazard Warnings journal June 2004
Considerations for Deploying xAI Tools in the Wild: Lessons Learned from xAI Deployment in a Cybersecurity Operations Setting.
  • Nyre-Yu, Megan; Morris, Elizabeth; Moss, Blake
  • Proposed for presentation at the ACM SIG Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining Workshop on Responsible AI held August 14-18, 2021 in Singapore, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.2172/1869535
conference May 2021
An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust journal July 1995
The Cognitive Effects of Machine Learning Aid in Domain-Specific and Domain-General Tasks conference January 2022
Examining Single- and Multiple-Process Theories of Trust in Automation journal July 2009

Similar Records

The Cognitive Effects of Machine Learning Aid in Domain-Specific and Domain-General Tasks.
Journal Article · Thu Dec 23 19:00:00 EST 2021 · Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · OSTI ID:1894594

Assessing Cognitive Impacts of Errors from Machine Learning and Deep Learning Models: Final Report
Technical Report · Wed Sep 01 00:00:00 EDT 2021 · OSTI ID:1821527

Related Subjects