mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Capturing Humans' Mental Models of AI: An Item Response Theory Approach

arXiv 2305.09064 ↗First posted 15 May 2023cs.LG cs.AI cs.HCcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Improving our understanding of how humans perceive AI teammates is an important foundation for our general understanding of human-AI teams. Extending relevant work from cognitive science, we propose a framework based on item response theory for modeling these perceptions. We apply this framework to real-world experiments, in which each participant works alongside another person or an AI agent in a question-answering setting, repeatedly assessing their teammate's performance. Using this experimental data, we demonstrate the use of our framework for testing research questions about people's perceptions of both AI agents and other people. We contrast mental models of AI teammates with those of human teammates as we characterize the dimensionality of these mental models, their development over time, and the influence of the participants' own self-perception. Our results indicate that people expect AI agents' performance to be significantly better on average than the performance of other humans, with less variation across different types of problems. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of these findings for human-AI interaction.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 76 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 May 2023.

Builds on

19 of 76 references.

References · 19

  1. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,374
  2. 2017Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciencescited by 1,206
  3. 2020UnifiedQA: Crossing Format Boundaries With a Single QA Systemcited by 476
  4. 2020Does the Whole Exceed its Parts? The Effect of AI Explanations on Complementary Team Performancecited by 399
  5. 2020Learning to Complement Humanscited by 124
  6. 2015Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAICcited by 110
  7. 2016Deep Learning for Identifying Metastatic Breast Cancercited by 93
  8. 2021Towards a Science of Human-AI Decision Making: A Survey of Empirical Studiescited by 86
  9. 2020A Case for Humans-in-the-Loop: Decisions in the Presence of Erroneous Algorithmic Scorescited by 74
  10. 2023Understanding the Role of Human Intuition on Reliance in Human-AI Decision-Making with Explanationscited by 73
  11. 2021The Spotlight: A General Method for Discovering Systematic Errors in Deep Learning Modelscited by 63
  12. 2022Human-Algorithm Collaboration: Achieving Complementarity and Avoiding Unfairnesscited by 45
7 more
  1. 2022The Utility of Explainable AI in Ad Hoc Human-Machine Teamingcited by 30
  2. 2019What Question Answering can Learn from Trivia Nerdscited by 21
  3. 2021Designing for human-AI complementarity in K-12 educationcited by 19
  4. 2022Collective Intelligence in Human-AI Teams: A Bayesian Theory of Mind Approachcited by 16
  5. 2021Brittle AI, Causal Confusion, and Bad Mental Models: Challenges and Successes in the XAI Programcited by 11
  6. 2020A Bandit Model for Human-Machine Decision Making with Private Information and Opacitycited by 10
  7. 2021Improving Users' Mental Model with Attention-directed Counterfactual Editscited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 2; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

8 papers.