mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Why Would You Suggest That? Human Trust in Language Model Responses

arXiv 2406.02018 ↗First posted 4 Jun 2024cs.CL cs.AI cs.HCcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has revealed a growing need for human-AI collaboration, especially in creative decision-making scenarios where trust and reliance are paramount. Through human studies and model evaluations on the open-ended News Headline Generation task from the LaMP benchmark, we analyze how the framing and presence of explanations affect user trust and model performance. Overall, we provide evidence that adding an explanation in the model response to justify its reasoning significantly increases self-reported user trust in the model when the user has the opportunity to compare various responses. Position and faithfulness of these explanations are also important factors. However, these gains disappear when users are shown responses independently, suggesting that humans trust all model responses, including deceptive ones, equitably when they are shown in isolation. Our findings urge future research to delve deeper into the nuanced evaluation of trust in human-machine teaming systems.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Jun 2024.

Builds on

16 of 30 references.

References · 16

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,160
  3. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  4. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  5. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,400
  6. 2023Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Promptingcited by 1,081
  7. 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 590
  8. 2020Does the Whole Exceed its Parts? The Effect of AI Explanations on Complementary Team Performancecited by 396
  9. 2023Exploring the Limits of ChatGPT for Query or Aspect-based Text Summarizationcited by 122
  10. 2023Can Large Language Models Explain Themselves? A Study of LLM-Generated Self-Explanationscited by 90
  11. 2023Do Models Explain Themselves? Counterfactual Simulatability of Natural Language Explanationscited by 85
  12. 2021Few-Shot Self-Rationalization with Natural Language Promptscited by 83
4 more
  1. 2023Bridging the Gap: A Survey on Integrating (Human) Feedback for Natural Language Generationcited by 55
  2. 2021Evaluation of Human-AI Teams for Learned and Rule-Based Agents in Hanabicited by 37
  3. 2020What does BERT know about books, movies and music? Probing BERT for Conversational Recommendationcited by 36
  4. 2024Tell Me What You Want (What You Really, Really Want): Addressing the Expectation Gap for Goal Conveyance from Humans to Robotscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 5; 2026: 1.

9 papers.