Understanding, explaining, and utilizing medical artificial intelligence

IF 21.4 1区 心理学 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES Nature Human Behaviour Pub Date : 2021-06-28 DOI:10.1038/s41562-021-01146-0
Romain Cadario, Chiara Longoni, Carey K. Morewedge
{"title":"Understanding, explaining, and utilizing medical artificial intelligence","authors":"Romain Cadario, Chiara Longoni, Carey K. Morewedge","doi":"10.1038/s41562-021-01146-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Medical artificial intelligence is cost-effective and scalable and often outperforms human providers, yet people are reluctant to use it. We show that resistance to the utilization of medical artificial intelligence is driven by both the subjective difficulty of understanding algorithms (the perception that they are a ‘black box’) and by an illusory subjective understanding of human medical decision-making. In five pre-registered experiments (1–3B: N = 2,699), we find that people exhibit an illusory understanding of human medical decision-making (study 1). This leads people to believe they better understand decisions made by human than algorithmic healthcare providers (studies 2A,B), which makes them more reluctant to utilize algorithmic than human providers (studies 3A,B). Fortunately, brief interventions that increase subjective understanding of algorithmic decision processes increase willingness to utilize algorithmic healthcare providers (studies 3A,B). A sixth study on Google Ads for an algorithmic skin cancer detection app finds that the effectiveness of such interventions generalizes to field settings (study 4: N = 14,013). Cadario et al. identify potential reasons underlying the resistance to use medical artificial intelligence and test interventions to overcome this resistance.","PeriodicalId":19074,"journal":{"name":"Nature Human Behaviour","volume":"5 12","pages":"1636-1642"},"PeriodicalIF":21.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1038/s41562-021-01146-0","citationCount":"50","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Human Behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-021-01146-0","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 50

Abstract

Medical artificial intelligence is cost-effective and scalable and often outperforms human providers, yet people are reluctant to use it. We show that resistance to the utilization of medical artificial intelligence is driven by both the subjective difficulty of understanding algorithms (the perception that they are a ‘black box’) and by an illusory subjective understanding of human medical decision-making. In five pre-registered experiments (1–3B: N = 2,699), we find that people exhibit an illusory understanding of human medical decision-making (study 1). This leads people to believe they better understand decisions made by human than algorithmic healthcare providers (studies 2A,B), which makes them more reluctant to utilize algorithmic than human providers (studies 3A,B). Fortunately, brief interventions that increase subjective understanding of algorithmic decision processes increase willingness to utilize algorithmic healthcare providers (studies 3A,B). A sixth study on Google Ads for an algorithmic skin cancer detection app finds that the effectiveness of such interventions generalizes to field settings (study 4: N = 14,013). Cadario et al. identify potential reasons underlying the resistance to use medical artificial intelligence and test interventions to overcome this resistance.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
理解、解释和利用医学人工智能
医疗人工智能具有成本效益和可扩展性,通常优于人类医疗服务提供者,但人们却不愿意使用它。我们的研究表明,人们对使用医疗人工智能的抵触情绪既是由于主观上难以理解算法(认为算法是一个 "黑盒子"),也是由于主观上对人类医疗决策的错误理解。在五项预先登记的实验(1-3B:N = 2,699)中,我们发现人们对人类医疗决策表现出一种虚幻的理解(研究 1)。这导致人们认为自己比算法医疗服务提供者更能理解人类做出的决策(研究 2A、B),从而使他们比人类医疗服务提供者更不愿意使用算法医疗服务提供者(研究 3A、B)。幸运的是,简短的干预措施能增加人们对算法决策过程的主观理解,从而提高使用算法医疗服务提供者的意愿(研究 3A、B)。第六项研究对谷歌广告中的一款算法皮肤癌检测应用进行了研究,发现此类干预措施的有效性可推广至实地环境(研究 4:N = 14,013)。Cadario 等人指出了医疗人工智能使用阻力的潜在原因,并测试了克服这种阻力的干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nature Human Behaviour
Nature Human Behaviour Psychology-Social Psychology
CiteScore
36.80
自引率
1.00%
发文量
227
期刊介绍: Nature Human Behaviour is a journal that focuses on publishing research of outstanding significance into any aspect of human behavior.The research can cover various areas such as psychological, biological, and social bases of human behavior.It also includes the study of origins, development, and disorders related to human behavior.The primary aim of the journal is to increase the visibility of research in the field and enhance its societal reach and impact.
期刊最新文献
Ethics of genomic research on occupational status Predicting surprise across contexts Incorporate climate injustice into carbon labels Behaviour-based dependency networks between places shape urban economic resilience The relationship between the youth-led Fridays for Future climate movement and voting, politician and media behaviour in Germany
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1