ArticleBrain informatics2026
Explainable artificial intelligence in air traffic control: effects of expertise on workload, acceptance, and usage intentions.
Article in Brain informatics, 2026. 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Explainability is crucial for establishing user trust in Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly within safety-critical domains such as Air Traffic Management (ATM) and Air Traffic Control (ATC). This study empirically investigates the effects of Explainable AI (XAI), specifically HeatMap-based visual explanations, on cognitive workload, user acceptance, and intention to use AI-driven decision-support systems among Air Traffic Control Officers (ATCOs). Despite significant theoretical advancements in the broader XAI domain, empirical evidence addressing the specific impact of visual explanations on human-AI interactions in safety-critical environments like ATC remains limited. To address these critical gaps, an experimental comparison was conducted between explainable (HeatMap) and non-explainable (BlackBox) AI conditions, involving two user groups: expert and student ATCOs. Both objective neurophysiological measures (Electroencephalography) and subjective questionnaires were employed to capture comprehensive user responses. Key findings revealed that the presence of visual explanations significantly reduced cognitive workload and enhanced users' willingness to adopt the AI system, regardless of participants' level of expertise. However, explicit perceptions of AI's impact on work performance were predominantly influenced by expertise, with less experienced controllers reporting a greater perceived impact than their expert counterparts. By combining objective neurometrics with subjective user assessments, this research advances methodological rigor in evaluating human-AI interactions and highlights the importance of tailored, user-centric explanations. These findings directly contribute to practical guidelines for designing cognitively compatible and trustworthy AI tools in ATC, providing nuanced insights for targeted training and deployment strategies based on user expertise.
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.