ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2024
Factors influencing trust in algorithmic decision-making: an indirect scenario-based experiment.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
43 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Algorithms are involved in decisions ranging from trivial to significant, but people often express distrust toward them. Research suggests that educational efforts to explain how algorithms work may help mitigate this distrust. In a study of 1,921 participants from 20 countries, we examined differences in algorithmic trust for low-stakes and high-stakes decisions. Our results suggest that statistical literacy is negatively associated with trust in algorithms for high-stakes situations, while it is positively associated with trust in low-stakes scenarios with high algorithm familiarity. However, explainability did not appear to influence trust in algorithms. We conclude that having statistical literacy enables individuals to critically evaluate the decisions made by algorithms, data and AI, and consider them alongside other factors before making significant life decisions. This ensures that individuals are not solely relying on algorithms that may not fully capture the complexity and nuances of human behavior and decision-making. Therefore, policymakers should consider promoting statistical/AI literacy to address some of the complexities associated with trust in algorithms. This work paves the way for further research, including the triangulation of data with direct observations of user interactions with algorithms or physiological measures to assess trust more accurately.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.