IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0318874.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Algorithm, expert, or both? Evaluating the role of feature selection methods on user preferences and reliance

Author

Listed:
  • Jaroslaw Kornowicz
  • Kirsten Thommes

Abstract

The integration of users and experts in machine learning is a widely studied topic in artificial intelligence literature. Similarly, human-computer interaction research extensively explores the factors that influence the acceptance of AI as a decision support system. In this experimental study, we investigate users’ preferences regarding the integration of experts in the development of such systems and how this affects their reliance on these systems. Specifically, we focus on the process of feature selection—an element that is gaining importance due to the growing demand for transparency in machine learning models. We differentiate between three feature selection methods: algorithm-based, expert-based, and a combined approach. In the first treatment, we analyze users’ preferences for these methods. In the second treatment, we randomly assign users to one of the three methods and analyze whether the method affects advice reliance. Users prefer the combined method, followed by the expert-based and algorithm-based methods. However, the users in the second treatment rely equally on all methods. Thus, we find a remarkable difference between stated preferences and actual usage, revealing a significant attitude-behavior-gap. Moreover, allowing the users to choose their preferred method had no effect, and the preferences and the extent of reliance were domain-specific. The findings underscore the importance of understanding cognitive processes in AI-supported decisions and the need for behavioral experiments in human-AI interactions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jaroslaw Kornowicz & Kirsten Thommes, 2025. "Algorithm, expert, or both? Evaluating the role of feature selection methods on user preferences and reliance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(3), pages 1-22, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0318874
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0318874
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0318874
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0318874&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0318874?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:dar:wpaper:138565 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0318874. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.