Aaron Springer
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
It is essential that users understand how algorithmic decisions are made, as we increasingly delegate important decisions to intelligent systems. Prior work has often taken a techno-centric approach, focusing on new computational techniques to support transparency. In contrast, this article employs empirical methods to better understand user reactions to transparent systems to motivate user-centric designs for transparent systems. We assess user reactions to transparency feedback in four studies of an emotional analytics system. In Study 1, users anticipated that a transparent system would perform better but unexpectedly retracted this evaluation after experience with the system. Study 2 offers an explanation for this paradox by showing that the benefits of transparency are context dependent. On the one hand, transparency can help users form a model of the underlying algorithm's operation. On the other hand, positive accuracy perceptions may be undermined when transparency reveals algorithmic errors. Study 3 explored real-time reactions to transparency. Results confirmed Study 2, in showing that users are both more likely to consult transparency information and to experience greater system insights when formulating a model of system operation. Study 4 used qualitative methods to explore real-time user reactions to motivate transparency design principles. Results again suggest that users may benefit from initially simplified feedback that hides potential system errors and assists users in building working heuristics about system operation. We use these findings to motivate new progressive disclosure principles for transparency in intelligent systems and discuss theoretical implications.
- Ashraf Abdul, Jo Vermeulen, Danding Wang, Brian Y. Lim, and Mohan Kankanhalli. 2018. Trends and trajectories for explainable, accountable and intelligible systems: An HCI research agenda. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’18). 1--18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174156Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Icek Ajzen. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organiz. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50, 2 (1991), 179--211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-TGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Julia Angwin and Jeff Larson. 2016. Machine bias. ProPublica. Retrieved October 27, 2017 from https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing.Google Scholar
- Stavros Antifakos, Nicky Kern, Bernt Schiele, and Adrian Schwaninger. 2005. Towards improving trust in context-aware systems by displaying system confidence. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices 8 Services (MobileHCI’05). 9. https://doi.org/10.1145/1085777.1085780Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leila Arras, Franziska Horn, Grégoire Montavon, Klaus-Robert Müller, and Wojciech Samek. 2017. “What is relevant in a text document?”: An interpretable machine learning approach. PLoS One 12, 8 (2017), e0181142. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181142Google ScholarCross Ref
- Victoria Bellotti and Keith Edwards. 2001. Intelligibility and accountability: Human considerations in context-aware systems. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 16, 2 (2001), 193--212. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327051HCI16234_05Google ScholarDigital Library
- Frank Bentley, Konrad Tollmar, Peter Stephenson, Laura Levy, Brian Jones, Scott Robertson, Ed Price, Richard Catrambone, and Jeff Wilson. 2013. Health mashups: Presenting statistical patterns between wellbeing data and context in natural language to promote behavior change. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 20, 5 (2013), 1--27. https://doi.org/10.1145/2503823Google ScholarDigital Library
- Reuben Binns, Max Van Kleek, Michael Veale, Ulrik Lyngs, Jun Zhao, and Nigel Shadbolt. 2018. “It's reducing a human being to a percentage”; Perceptions of justice in algorithmic decisions. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’18). 1--14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173951Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tolga Bolukbasi, Kai-Wei Chang, James Y. Zou, Venkatesh Saligrama, and Adam T. Kalai. 2016. Man is to computer programmer as woman is to homemaker? Debiasing word embeddings. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 4349--4357.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Engin Bozdag. 2013. Bias in algorithmic filtering and personalization. Ethics Inf. Technol. 15, 3 (2013), 209--227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-013-9321-6Google ScholarDigital Library
- Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3, 2 (2006), 77--101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oaGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Andrea Bunt, Matthew Lount, and Catherine Lauzon. 2012. Are explanations always important?: A study of deployed, low-cost intelligent interactive systems. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. 169--178.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Moira Burke, Brian Amento, and Philip Isenhour. 2006. Error correction of voicemail transcripts in SCANMail. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’06). ACM, New York, NY, 339--348. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1124772.1124823Google ScholarDigital Library
- John T. Cacioppo, Richard E. Petty, and Chuan Feng Kao. 1984. The efficient assessment of need for cognition. J. Pers. Assess. 48, 3 (1984), 306--307. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_13Google ScholarCross Ref
- John M. Carroll and Caroline Carrithers. 1984. Training wheels in a user interface. Commun. ACM 27, 8 (1984), 800--806. https://doi.org/10.1145/358198.358218Google ScholarDigital Library
- CCS Insight. 2016. CCS Insight Wearables End-user Survey. Retrieved August 11, 2018 from http://www.ccsinsight.com/.Google Scholar
- Eun Kyoung Choe, Bongshin Lee, Haining Zhu, Nathalie Henry Riche, and Dominikus Baur. 2017. Understanding self-reflection: How people reflect on personal data through visual data exploration. In Proceedings of the 11th EAI International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare (PervasiveHealth’17). 173--182. https://doi.org/10.1145/3154862.3154881Google ScholarDigital Library
- Eun Kyoung Choe, Nicole B. Lee, Bongshin Lee, Wanda Pratt, and Julie A. Kientz. 2014. Understanding quantified-selfers’ practices in collecting and exploring personal data. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’14). 1143--1152. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557372Google Scholar
- Mary L. Cummings. 2004. Automation bias in intelligent time critical decision support systems. In Proceedings of the AIAA 1st Intelligent Systems Technical Conference. 557--562.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Michael A. DeVito, Jeremy Birnholtz, Jeffery T. Hancock, Megan French, and Sunny Liu. 2018. How people form folk theories of social media feeds and what it means for how we study self-presentation. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’18). 1--12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173694Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2018. BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv:1810.04805 [cs]. Retrieved December 27, 2018 from http://arxiv.org/abs/1810.04805.Google Scholar
- Mary T. Dzindolet, Scott A. Peterson, Regina A. Pomranky, Linda G. Pierce, and Hall P. Beck. 2003. The role of trust in automation reliance. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud 58, 6 (2003), 697--718. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00038-7Google ScholarDigital Library
- Malin Eiband, Hanna Schneider, Mark Bilandzic, Julian Fazekas-Con, Mareike Haug, and Heinrich Hussmann. 2018. Bringing transparency design into practice. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI’18), 211--223. https://doi.org/10.1145/3172944.3172961Google ScholarDigital Library
- Motahhare Eslami, Karrie Karahalios, Christian Sandvig, Kristen Vaccaro, Aimee Rickman, Kevin Hamilton, and Alex Kirlik. 2016. First i like it, then i hide it: Folk theories of social feeds. In Proceedings of the 2016 cHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2371--2382.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Motahhare Eslami, Sneha R. Krishna Kumaran, Christian Sandvig, and Karrie Karahalios. 2018. Communicating algorithmic process in online behavioral advertising. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’18). 432:1--432:13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174006Google ScholarDigital Library
- Motahhare Eslami, Aimee Rickman, Kristen Vaccaro, Amirhossein Aleyasen, Andy Vuong, Karrie Karahalios, Kevin Hamilton, and Christian Sandvig. 2015. I always assumed that i wasn't really that close to [Her]”: Reasoning about invisible algorithms in news feeds. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’15). 153--162. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702556Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mads Frost, Afsaneh Doryab, Maria Faurholt-Jepsen, Lars Vedel Kessing, and Jakob E. Bardram. 2013. Supporting disease insight through data analysis: Refinements of the monarca self-assessment system. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. ACM, New York, 133--142. https://doi.org/10.1145/2493432.2493507Google Scholar
- Pedro García Garcia, Enrico Costanza, Jhim Verame, Diana Nowacka, and Sarvapali D. Ramchurn. (in press). Seeing (Movement) is believing: The effect of motion on perception of automatic systems performance. To appear in Hum.--Comput Interact. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2018.1453815Google Scholar
- Harold Garfinkel. 1991. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Wiley.Google Scholar
- K. Goddard, A. Roudsari, and J. C. Wyatt. 2012. Automation bias: A systematic review of frequency, effect mediators, and mitigators. J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. 19, 1 (2012), 121--127. DOI:10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000089. PMC 3240751. PMID 21685142.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bryce Goodman and Seth Flaxman. 2017. European union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a “right to explanation.” AI Mag. 38, 3 (2017), 50--57. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v38i3.2741Google ScholarCross Ref
- H. P. Grice. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Syntax and Semantics, P. Cole and J. Morgan (Eds.), Vol. 3. Academic Press.Google Scholar
- E. Grossi, N. Groth, P. Mosconi, R. Cerutti, F. Pace, A. Compare, and G. Apolone. 2006. Development and validation of the short version of the Psychological General Well-Being Index (PGWB-S). Health Qual. Life Outcomes 4, 88 (2006). DOI:10.1186/1477-7525-4-88Google Scholar
- Chloe Gui and Victoria Chan. 2017. Machine learning in medicine. Univ. West. Ont. Med. J. 86, 2 (2017), 76--78. https://doi.org/10.5206/uwomj.v86i2.2060Google ScholarCross Ref
- Moritz Hardt, Eric Price, and Nathan Srebro. 2016. Equality of opportunity in supervised learning. arXiv:1610.02413 [cs]. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1610.02413.Google Scholar
- Sandra G. Hart and Lowell E. Staveland. 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (task load index): results of empirical and theoretical research. In Advances in Psychology, Peter A. Hancock and Najmedin Meshkati (eds.). North-Holland, 139--183. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9Google Scholar
- Denis J. Hilton. 1990. Conversational processes and causal explanation. Psychol. Bull. 107, 1 (1990), 65--81. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.1.65Google ScholarCross Ref
- Victoria Hollis, Artie Konrad, Aaron Springer, Chris Antoun, Matthew Antoun, Rob Martin, and Steve Whittaker. 2017. What does all this data mean for my future mood? actionable analytics and targeted reflection for emotional well-being. Hum.--Comput. Interact. 32, 5--6 (2017), 208--267. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2016.1277724Google Scholar
- Victoria Hollis, Alon Pekurovsky, Eunika Wu, and Steve Whittaker. 2018. On being told how we feel: How Algorithmic sensor feedback influences emotion perception. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wear. Ubiq. Technol. 2, 3 (2018), 114:1--114:31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3264924Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ellen Isaacs, Artie Konrad, Alan Walendowski, Thomas Lennig, Victoria Hollis, and Steve Whittaker. 2013. Echoes from the past: How technology mediated reflection improves well-being. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 1071--1080. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466137Google ScholarDigital Library
- Daniel Kahneman. 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Macmillan.Google Scholar
- SeungJun Kim, Jaemin Chun, and Anind K. Dey. 2015. Sensors know when to interrupt you in the car: Detecting driver interruptibility through monitoring of peripheral interactions. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’15). 487--496. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702409Google Scholar
- René F. Kizilcec. 2016. How much information?: Effects of transparency on trust in an algorithmic interface. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, 2390--2395. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858402Google ScholarDigital Library
- Todd Kulesza, Margaret Burnett, Weng-Keen Wong, and Simone Stumpf. 2015. Principles of explanatory debugging to personalize interactive machine learning. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI’15). 126--137. https://doi.org/10.1145/2678025.2701399Google ScholarDigital Library
- Todd Kulesza, Weng-Keen Wong, Simone Stumpf, Stephen Perona, Rachel White, Margaret M. Burnett, Ian Oberst, and Andrew J. Ko. 2008. Fixing the program my computer learned: Barriers for end users, challenges for the machine. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI’09). 187. https://doi.org/10.1145/1502650.1502678Google Scholar
- Bai. C. Kwon, M. Choi, J. T. Kim, E. Choi, Y. B. Kim, S. Kwon, J. Sun, and J. Choo. 2019. RetainVis: Visual analytics with interpretable and interactive recurrent neural networks on electronic medical records. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 25, 1 (2019), 299--309. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2018.2865027Google ScholarDigital Library
- Himabindu Lakkaraju, Ece Kamar, Rich Caruana, and Jure Leskovec. 2017. Interpretable 8 explorable approximations of black box models. arXiv:1707.01154 [cs]. Retrieved 18, 2018 from http://arxiv.org/abs/1707.01154.Google Scholar
- Shoushan Li, Lei Huang, Rong Wang, and Guodong Zhou. 2015. Sentence-level emotion classification with label and context dependence. In Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers). 1045--1053.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brian Y. Lim and Anind K. Dey. 2009. Assessing demand for intelligibility in context-aware applications. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing. 195--204.Google Scholar
- Brian Y. Lim and Anind K. Dey. 2011. Investigating intelligibility for uncertain context-aware applications. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing. 415--424.Google Scholar
- Brian Y. Lim, Anind K. Dey, and Daniel Avrahami. 2009. Why and why not explanations improve the intelligibility of context-aware intelligent systems. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’09). 2119. https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1519023Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zachary C. Lipton. 2016. The mythos of model interpretability. arXiv:1606.03490 [cs, stat]. Retrieved September 21, 2018 from http://arxiv.org/abs/1606.03490.Google Scholar
- Yin Lou, Rich Caruana, and Johannes Gehrke. 2012. Intelligible Models for Classification and Regression. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. ACM, New York, 150--158. https://doi.org/10.1145/2339530.2339556Google ScholarDigital Library
- Scott M. Lundberg and Su-In Lee. 2017. A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions. 10.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Daniel McDuff, Amy Karlson, Ashish Kapoor, Asta Roseway, and Mary Czerwinski. 2012. AffectAura: An intelligent system for emotional memory. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 849--858.Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Micenková, R. T. Ng, X. Dang, and I. Assent. 2013. Explaining outliers by subspace separability. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 13th International Conference on Data Mining. 518--527. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDM.2013.132Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tim Miller. 2017. Explanation in artificial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences. arXiv:1706.07269 [cs]. Retrieved September 17, 2018 from http://arxiv.org/abs/1706.07269.Google Scholar
- Grégoire Montavon, Wojciech Samek, and Klaus-Robert Müller. 2018. Methods for interpreting and understanding deep neural networks. Dig. Sign. Process. 73 (2018), 1--15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsp.2017.10.011Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kathleen L. Mosier, Linda J. Skitka, Susan Heers, and Mark Burdick. 1998. Automation bias: Decision making and performance in high-tech cockpits. Int. J. Aviat. Psychol. 8, 1 (1998), 47--46. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0801_3Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bonnie M. Muir and Neville Moray. 1996. Trust in automation. Part II. Experimental Studies of Trust and Human Intervention in a Process Control Simulation. Ergonomics 39, 3 (1996), 429--460. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139608964474Google ScholarCross Ref
- Saurabh Nagrecha, John Z. Dillon, and Nitesh V. Chawla. 2017. MOOC Dropout prediction: Lessons learned from making pipelines interpretable. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion (WWW Companion’17). 351--359. https://doi.org/10.1145/3041021.3054162Google Scholar
- Lloyd H. Nakatani and John A. Rohrlich. 1983. Soft machines: A philosophy of user-computer interface design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’83). 19--23. https://doi.org/10.1145/800045.801573Google Scholar
- Clifford Nass and Youngme Moon. 2000. Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. J. Soc. Issues 56, 1 (2000), 81--103. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00153Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cathy O'Neil. 2016. Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Crown.Google Scholar
- Eli Pariser. 2011. The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. Penguin Books Limited.Google ScholarDigital Library
- James W. Pennebaker. 2011. The Secret Life of Pronouns: What Our Words Say about Us. Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
- Richard E. Petty and John T. Cacioppo. 1986. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Vol. 19. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 123--205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2Google Scholar
- Pip. Retrieved September 21, 2018 from https://thepip.com/en-us/.Google Scholar
- Michael. F. Porter. 1980. An algorithm for suffix stripping. Program 14, 3 (1980), 130--137. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb046814Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mashfiqui Rabbi, Min Hane Aung, Mi Zhang, and Tanzeem Choudhury. 2015. MyBehavior: Automatic personalized health feedback from user behaviors and preferences using smartphones. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. 707--718.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lena Reed, Jiaqi Wu, Shereen Oraby, Pranav Anand, and Marilyn Walker. 2017. Learning lexico-functional patterns for first-person affect. In Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers). 141--147.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Byron Reeves and Clifford Nass. 1996. The media equation: How people treat computers. In Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Sameer Singh, and Carlos Guestrin. 2016. “Why should i trust you?”: Explaining the predictions of any classifier. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. 1135--1144. https://doi.org/10.1145/2939672.2939778Google ScholarDigital Library
- Stephanie Rude, Eva-Maria Gortner, and James Pennebaker. 2004. Language use of depressed and depression-vulnerable college students. Cogn. Emot. 18, 8 (2004), 1121--1133. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930441000030Google ScholarCross Ref
- Emanuel A. Schegloff. 1992. Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. Am. J. Sociol. 97, 5 (1992), 1295--1345.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David Canfield Smith. 1982. Designing the Star User Interface. Byte Magazine, April, 1982, 242--282.Google Scholar
- Aaron Springer and Henriette Cramer. 2018. “Play PRBLMS”: Identifying and correcting less accessible content in voice interfaces. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’18). 296:1--296:13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173870Google ScholarDigital Library
- Aaron Springer, Victoria Hollis, and Steve Whittaker. 2017. Dice in the black box: User experiences with an inscrutable algorithm. Retrieved April 24, 2017 from https://aaai.org/ocs/index.php/SSS/SSS17/paper/view/15372.Google Scholar
- Aaron Springer, Victoria Hollis, and Steve Whittaker. 2018. Mood modeling: Accuracy depends on active logging and reflection. Pers. Ubiquit. Comput. 22 (2018), 723--737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-018-1123-8Google ScholarDigital Library
- Aaron Springer and Steve Whittaker. 2018. What are you hiding? algorithmic transparency and user perceptions. In Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI Spring Symposium Series.Google Scholar
- Litza Stark, Steve Whittaker, and Julia Hirschberg. 2000. ASR satisficing: The effects of ASR accuracy on speech retrieval. In Processing of the International Conference on Speech and Language Processing (ICSLP-2000), 1069--1072.Google Scholar
- Rachael Tatman. 2017. Gender and dialect bias in youtube's automatic captions. In Proceedings of the Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL’17). 53.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kristen Vaccaro, Dylan Huang, Motahhare Eslami, Christian Sandvig, Kevin Hamilton, and Karrie Karahalios. 2018. The illusion of control: Placebo effects of control settings. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’18). 1--16:13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173590Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jeffrey Warshaw, Tara Matthews, Steve Whittaker, Chris Kau, Mateo Bengualid, and Barton A. Smith. 2015. Can an algorithm know the “real you”?: Understanding people's reactions to hyper-personal analytics systems. 797--806. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702274Google Scholar
- Daniel S. Weld and Gagan Bansal. 2018. The challenge of crafting intelligible intelligence. arXiv:1803.04263 [cs]. Retrieved September 20, 2018 from http://arxiv.org/abs/1803.04263.Google Scholar
- Wickens Christopher, Hollands Justin, Banbury Simon, and Parasuraman Raja. 2015. Engineering Psychology and Human Performance, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.Google Scholar
- Jenna Wiens and Erica S. Shenoy. 2018. Machine learning for healthcare: On the verge of a major shift in healthcare epidemiology. Clin. Infect. Dis. 66, 1 (2018), 149--153. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cix731Google ScholarCross Ref
- Woebot—Your Charming Robot Friend Who Is Here for You, 24/7. Retrieved September 21, 2018 from https://woebot.io.Google Scholar
- Rayoung Yang and Mark W. Newman. 2013. Learning from a learning thermostat: Lessons for intelligent systems for the home. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp’13). 93. https://doi.org/10.1145/2493432.2493489Google Scholar
- Miriam Zisook, Sara Taylor, Akane Sano, and Rosalind Picard. 2016. SNAPSHOT Expose: Stage based and social theory based applications to reduce stress and improve wellbeing. Retrieved March 10, 2017 from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b283/53899d0c5059a31c9bc69c364e62bc6c7ff5.pdf.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Progressive Disclosure: When, Why, and How Do Users Want Algorithmic Transparency Information?
Recommendations
Progressive disclosure: empirically motivated approaches to designing effective transparency
IUI '19: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Intelligent User InterfacesAs we increasingly delegate important decisions to intelligent systems, it is essential that users understand how algorithmic decisions are made. Prior work has often taken a technocentric approach to transparency. In contrast, we explore empirical user-...
Enabling Effective Transparency: Towards User-Centric Intelligent Systems
AIES '19: Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and SocietyMuch of the current research in transparency and explainability is highly technical and focuses on how to derive explanations from models and algorithms. Less thought is being given to how users actually want to receive transparency and explanations ...
TExSS: Transparency and Explanations in Smart Systems
IUI '21 Companion: Companion Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Intelligent User InterfacesSmart systems that apply complex reasoning to make decisions and plan behavior, such as decision support systems and personalized recommendations, are difficult for users to understand. Algorithms allow the exploitation of rich and varied data sources, ...
Comments