mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Understanding the Effects of Miscalibrated AI Confidence on User Trust, Reliance, and Decision Efficacy

arXiv 2402.07632 ↗First posted 12 Feb 2024cs.AI cs.HCcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Providing well-calibrated AI confidence can help promote users' appropriate trust in and reliance on AI, which are essential for AI-assisted decision-making. However, calibrating AI confidence -- providing confidence score that accurately reflects the true likelihood of AI being correct -- is known to be challenging. To understand the effects of AI confidence miscalibration, we conducted our first experiment. The results indicate that miscalibrated AI confidence impairs users' appropriate reliance and reduces AI-assisted decision-making efficacy, and AI miscalibration is difficult for users to detect. Then, in our second experiment, we examined whether communicating AI confidence calibration levels could mitigate the above issues. We find that it helps users to detect AI miscalibration. Nevertheless, since such communication decreases users' trust in uncalibrated AI, leading to high under-reliance, it does not improve the decision efficacy. We discuss design implications based on these findings and future directions to address risks and ethical concerns associated with AI miscalibration.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 72 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Feb 2024.

Builds on

19 of 72 references.

References · 19

  1. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
  2. 2023Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMscited by 974
  3. 2020How Can We Know When Language Models Know? On the Calibration of Language Models for Question Answeringcited by 445
  4. 2020Does the Whole Exceed its Parts? The Effect of AI Explanations on Complementary Team Performancecited by 399
  5. 2020Effect of Confidence and Explanation on Accuracy and Trust Calibration in AI-Assisted Decision Makingcited by 281
  6. 2018Manipulating and Measuring Model Interpretabilitycited by 256
  7. 2020Mix-n-Match: Ensemble and Compositional Methods for Uncertainty Calibration in Deep Learningcited by 190
  8. 2018On Human Predictions with Explanations and Predictions of Machine Learning Models: A Case Study on Deception Detectioncited by 159
  9. 2020Proxy Tasks and Subjective Measures Can Be Misleading in Evaluating Explainable AI Systemscited by 139
  10. 2021Be Confident! Towards Trustworthy Graph Neural Networks via Confidence Calibrationcited by 92
  11. 2020"Why is 'Chicago' deceptive?" Towards Building Model-Driven Tutorials for Humanscited by 86
  12. 2021Towards a Science of Human-AI Decision Making: A Survey of Empirical Studiescited by 86
7 more
  1. 2023Who Should I Trust: AI or Myself? Leveraging Human and AI Correctness Likelihood to Promote Appropriate Trust in AI-Assisted Decision-Makingcited by 67
  2. 2020Deciding Fast and Slow: The Role of Cognitive Biases in AI-assisted Decision-makingcited by 59
  3. 2021Do Humans Trust Advice More if it Comes from AI? An Analysis of Human-AI Interactionscited by 35
  4. 2019Assessing the Local Interpretability of Machine Learning Modelscited by 23
  5. 2021Uncertainty Quantification 360: A Holistic Toolkit for Quantifying and Communicating the Uncertainty of AIcited by 22
  6. 2020Deceptive AI Explanations: Creation and Detectioncited by 14
  7. 2024Does More Advice Help? The Effects of Second Opinions in AI-Assisted Decision Makingcited by 14

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 5.

6 papers.