Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
41 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
60 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
44 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
8 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Deciding Fast and Slow: The Role of Cognitive Biases in AI-assisted Decision-making (2010.07938v2)

Published 15 Oct 2020 in cs.HC and cs.LG

Abstract: Several strands of research have aimed to bridge the gap between AI and human decision-makers in AI-assisted decision-making, where humans are the consumers of AI model predictions and the ultimate decision-makers in high-stakes applications. However, people's perception and understanding are often distorted by their cognitive biases, such as confirmation bias, anchoring bias, availability bias, to name a few. In this work, we use knowledge from the field of cognitive science to account for cognitive biases in the human-AI collaborative decision-making setting, and mitigate their negative effects on collaborative performance. To this end, we mathematically model cognitive biases and provide a general framework through which researchers and practitioners can understand the interplay between cognitive biases and human-AI accuracy. We then focus specifically on anchoring bias, a bias commonly encountered in human-AI collaboration. We implement a time-based de-anchoring strategy and conduct our first user experiment that validates its effectiveness in human-AI collaborative decision-making. With this result, we design a time allocation strategy for a resource-constrained setting that achieves optimal human-AI collaboration under some assumptions. We, then, conduct a second user experiment which shows that our time allocation strategy with explanation can effectively de-anchor the human and improve collaborative performance when the AI model has low confidence and is incorrect.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (6)
  1. Charvi Rastogi (18 papers)
  2. Yunfeng Zhang (45 papers)
  3. Dennis Wei (64 papers)
  4. Kush R. Varshney (121 papers)
  5. Amit Dhurandhar (62 papers)
  6. Richard Tomsett (7 papers)
Citations (81)