Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Journal . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Journal . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Journal . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

EXPLAINABILITY OVER ACCURACY: A HUMAN-CENTERED STUDY OF TRUST IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Authors: Kaushal Karthikeyan Nadar;

EXPLAINABILITY OVER ACCURACY: A HUMAN-CENTERED STUDY OF TRUST IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Abstract

As artificial intelligence becomes part of everyday decision-making, trust in these systems is no longer optional - it is essential. While most AI research focuses on improving accuracy, people often interact with systems that provide little to no explanation for their decisions. This study explores a simple but important question: do people trust AI systems that explain their decisions more than those that are highly accurate but opaque? To examine this, we compare two simulated AI models. One model delivers highly accurate decisions without explanation, while the other provides clear, understandable explanations with slightly lower accuracy. Participants are presented with AI-generated decisions in a controlled scenario and are asked to evaluate their level of trust, perceived fairness, confidence, and willingness to rely on each system. The results indicate that transparency plays a significant role in shaping user trust. Participants generally show a stronger preference for AI systems that offer explanations, even when they are informed that these systems may be marginally less accurate. Explanations help users feel more confident, involved, and assured that decisions are being made fairly. These findings suggest that accuracy alone is not sufficient for building trustworthy AI. Instead, explainability should be treated as a core design principle, especially in applications where human judgment, accountability, and ethical concerns are critical.

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average