It is argued that cognitive misalignment represents a likely impediment to AI adoption in many envisioned applications, and that addressing it is important for creating AI systems on which users are both willing and justified to rely.
Abstract
AI systems are increasingly employed as decision aids, decision delegates, or autonomous decision-makers. This position paper argues that in many settings, particularly high-stakes decision-making, we need accurate cognitively-aligned AI systems that reason similarly to their users, and faithfully communicate their reasoning. We review evidence that cognitive alignment improves understandability and trustworthiness, and provide new survey data showing that many users find cognitive alignment"essential"when an AI's rationale for a judgment or action is important to them. We outline the gaps between existing alignment methods and what is needed to achieve cognitive alignment, and present a research agenda to address these gaps. We argue that cognitive misalignment represents a likely impediment to AI adoption in many envisioned applications, and that addressing it is important for creating AI systems on which users are both willing and justified to rely.
It is argued that intelligence alone cannot determine appropriate goals, guide action under uncertainty, or ensure beneficial human outcomes, and proposed artificial wisdom as a needed corrective for conversational systems.
Matthias Kraus· International Conference on...· 0 citations
It is argued that psychological competence should become a core consideration for model providers, deploying organizations, researchers, and regulators concerned with the real-world effects of human-facing AI systems.
M. Economides, Paul M. Sacher, Samuel Salzer et al.· 0 citations
This article proposes a five-part Human–AI Collaboration Framework designed to help organizations use AI for efficiency while keeping human judgment active and accountable in key Human Resource Management decisions, and offers practical guidance for responsible AI integration.
Daniel Altieri, Zohra Damani, Cynthia L. Nebel· Administrative Sciences· 0 citations
This conceptual and normative paper links together research on anthropomorphism, mental models, trust calibration and AI-assisted decision-making into a single end-to-end chain, proposing a conceptual model with propositions for empirical testing.
It is found that at least for the time being, explicit normative instructions are not fully able to realign AI advice with the normative convictions of the population, or the legislator deciding on its behalf.
This position paper argues that human-centered explainable AI (HCXAI) should incorporate insights from the psychology of information seeking. Drawing on Sharot and Sunstein's framework of information-seeking motives, we propose that people evaluate whether to engage with explanations based on three types of expected ut...
Andrea Beretta, Salvatore Rinzivillo· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.