What's at Stake? Robot explanations matter for high but not low-stake scenarios

被引:0
|
作者
Melsion, Gaspar Isaac [1 ]
Stower, Rebecca [1 ]
Winkle, Katie [2 ]
Leite, Iolanda [1 ]
机构
[1] KTH Royal Inst Technol, Div Robot Percept & Learning, Stockholm, Sweden
[2] Uppsala Univ, Dept Informat Technol, Uppsala, Sweden
关键词
D O I
10.1109/RO-MAN57019.2023.10309566
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Although the field of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) in Human-Robot Interaction is gathering increasing attention, how well different explanations compare across HRI scenarios is still not well understood. We conducted an exploratory online study with 335 participants analysing the interaction between type of explanation (counterfactual, feature-based, and no explanation), the stake of the scenario (high, low) and the application scenario (healthcare, industry). Participants viewed one of 12 different vignettes depicting a combination of these three factors and rated their system understanding and trust in the robot. Compared to no explanation, both counterfactual and feature-based explanations improved system understanding and performance trust (but not moral trust). Additionally, when no explanation was present, high-stake scenarios led to significantly worse performance trust and system understanding. These findings suggest that explanations can be used to calibrate users' perceptions of the robot in high-stake scenarios.
引用
收藏
页码:2421 / 2426
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The use of secondary school student ratings of their teacher's skillfulness for low-stake assessment and high-stake evaluation
    van der Lans, Rikkert M.
    Maulana, Ridwan
    [J]. STUDIES IN EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION, 2018, 58 : 112 - 121
  • [2] Beliefs about the cues to deception in high- and low-stake situations
    Lakhani, M
    Taylor, R
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGY CRIME & LAW, 2003, 9 (04) : 357 - 368
  • [3] USING MOBILE TELEPHONY FOR LOW-STAKE SKILLS ASSESSMENT
    Mehta, Nimesh
    Goyal, Rajat
    [J]. 6TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND INNOVATION (ICERI 2013), 2013, : 3301 - 3306
  • [4] What's at stake
    不详
    [J]. JAVMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2013, 242 (04): : 431 - 431
  • [5] THE COURT: WHAT'S AT STAKE
    Schwartz, Herman
    [J]. NATION, 2008, 287 (14) : 13 - 16
  • [6] The measurement equivalence of personality measures across high- and low-stake test taking settings
    Ion, Andrei
    Iliescu, Dragos
    [J]. PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, 2017, 110 : 1 - 6
  • [7] Alcoholism: what's at stake?
    Balmes, JL
    [J]. GASTROENTEROLOGIE CLINIQUE ET BIOLOGIQUE, 1998, 22 (12): : 987 - 989
  • [8] High stakes testing: What is at stake?
    Randall, K
    McAnally, P
    Rittenhouse, B
    Russell, D
    Sorensen, G
    [J]. AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF, 2000, 145 (05) : 390 - 393
  • [9] What's At Stake in Emerging Horizons
    Moules, Nancy J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED HERMENEUTICS, 2022, 2022
  • [10] What's at Stake in the Race Debate?
    Mallon, Ron
    [J]. SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY, 2022, 60 : 54 - 72