IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/safewp/334511.html

Knowing (not) to know: Explainable artificial intelligence and human metacognition

Author

Listed:
  • von Zahn, Moritz
  • Liebich, Lena
  • Jussupow, Ekaterina
  • Hinz, Oliver
  • Bauer, Kevin

Abstract

The use of explainable AI (XAI) methods to render the prediction logic of black-box AI interpretable to humans is becoming more popular and more widely used in practice, among other things due to regulatory requirements such as the EU AI Act. Previous research on human-XAI interaction has shown that explainability may help mitigate black-box problems but also unintentionally alter individuals' cognitive processes, e.g., distorting their reasoning and evoking informational overload. While empirical evidence on the impact of XAI on how individuals "think" is growing, it has been largely overlooked whether XAI can even affect individuals' "thinking about thinking", i.e., metacognition, which theory conceptualizes to monitor and control previously-studied thinking processes. Aiming to take a first step in filling this gap, we investigate whether XAI affects confidence calibrations, and, thereby, decisions to transfer decision-making responsibility to AI, on the meta-level of cognition. We conduct two incentivized experiments in which human experts repeatedly perform prediction tasks, with the option to delegate each task to an AI. We exogenously vary whether participants initially receive explanations that reveal the AI's underlying prediction logic. We find that XAI improves individuals' metaknowledge (the alignment between confidence and actual performance) and partially enhances confidence sensitivity (the variation of confidence with task performance). These metacognitive shifts causally increase both the frequency and effectiveness of human-to-AI delegation decisions. Interestingly, these effects only occur when explanations reveal to individuals that AI's logic diverges from their own, leading to a systematic reduction in confidence. Our findings suggest that XAI can correct overconfidence at the potential cost of lowering confidence even when individuals perform well. Both effects influence decisions to cede responsibility to AI, highlighting metacognition as a central mechanism in human-XAI collaboration.

Suggested Citation

  • von Zahn, Moritz & Liebich, Lena & Jussupow, Ekaterina & Hinz, Oliver & Bauer, Kevin, 2025. "Knowing (not) to know: Explainable artificial intelligence and human metacognition," SAFE Working Paper Series 464, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:safewp:334511
    DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.5383106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/334511/1/1947737333.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2139/ssrn.5383106?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. Spitzer, Phillip & Kühl, Niklas & Goutier, Marc & Kaschura, Manuel & Satzger, Gerhard, 2024. "Transferring Domain Knowledge with (X)AI-Based Learning Systems," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 144928, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    2. Berkeley J. Dietvorst & Joseph P. Simmons & Cade Massey, 2018. "Overcoming Algorithm Aversion: People Will Use Imperfect Algorithms If They Can (Even Slightly) Modify Them," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1155-1170, March.
    3. ., 2024. "Building the rural future and alleviating rural poverty," Chapters, in: Transforming Rural China, chapter 9, pages 225-252, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. ., 2024. "Building policy in all the wrong places," Chapters, in: Growth Policies for the High-Tech Economy, chapter 3, pages 60-72, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. ., 2024. "Case studies - building a research career," Chapters, in: How to be a Successful Academic Researcher, chapter 5, pages 67-148, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Christophe Hurlin & Christophe Pérignon & Sébastien Saurin, 2026. "The Fairness of Credit Scoring Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(1), pages 406-425, January.
    7. Julian Senoner & Torbjørn Netland & Stefan Feuerriegel, 2022. "Using Explainable Artificial Intelligence to Improve Process Quality: Evidence from Semiconductor Manufacturing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(8), pages 5704-5723, August.
    8. Cram, W. Alec & Wiener, Martin & Tarafdar, Monideepa & Benlian, Alexander, 2022. "Examining the Impact of Algorithmic Control on Uber Drivers’ Technostress," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 130811, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    9. Jefferson Duarte & Stephan Siegel & Lance Young, 2012. "Trust and Credit: The Role of Appearance in Peer-to-peer Lending," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 25(8), pages 2455-2484.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cao, Jie & Zhu, Yingxin & Yin, Zhujia & Li, Jing & Chang, Chun-Ping, 2025. "Resilience of energy market under geopolitical risks: What’s the policy implications?," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1706-1724.
    2. Said Kaawach & Oskar Kowalewski & Oleksandr Talavera, 2023. "Automatic vs Manual Investing: Role of Past Performance," Discussion Papers 23-04, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    3. Lindner, Thomas & Puck, Jonas & Puhr, Harald, 2025. "Artificial intelligence in international business: IB theory under augmented decision-making," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 60(6).
    4. Maria De‐Arteaga & Stefan Feuerriegel & Maytal Saar‐Tsechansky, 2022. "Algorithmic fairness in business analytics: Directions for research and practice," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(10), pages 3749-3770, October.
    5. Notz, Pascal M. & Pibernik, Richard, 2024. "Explainable subgradient tree boosting for prescriptive analytics in operations management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 312(3), pages 1119-1133.
    6. Liang, Bingqian & Wang, Yixin & Huo, Weiwei & Song, Mengli & Shi, Yi, 2025. "Algorithmic control as a double-edged sword: Its relationship with service performance and work well-being," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    7. D’Acunto, Francesco & Ghosh, Pulak & Rossi, Alberto G., 2026. "How costly are cultural biases? Evidence from FinTech," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    8. Jörg Prokop & Dandan Wang, 2022. "Is there a gender gap in equity-based crowdfunding?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(3), pages 1219-1244, October.
    9. Franklin Allen & Meijun Qian, 2025. "Alternative finance in the international business context: a review and future research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 56(1), pages 43-61, February.
    10. Costello, Anna M. & Down, Andrea K. & Mehta, Mihir N., 2020. "Machine + man: A field experiment on the role of discretion in augmenting AI-based lending models," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2).
    11. Jens Hagendorff & Sonya Lim & Duc Duy Nguyen, 2023. "Lender Trust and Bank Loan Contracts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1758-1779, March.
    12. Bertrand, Jérémie & Burietz, Aurore, 2023. "(Loan) price and (loan officer) prejudice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 26-42.
    13. Manconi, Alberto & Braggion, Fabio & Zhu, Haikun, 2018. "Can Technology Undermine Macroprudential Regulation? Evidence from Peer-to-Peer Credit in China," CEPR Discussion Papers 12668, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Xuan Zhang, 2023. "The impact of digital finance on corporate labor productivity: evidence from Chinese-listed companies," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 50(3), pages 527-550, September.
    15. Cao, Cejun & He, Yufan & Liu, Yang & Huang, Hao & Zhang, Fanshun, 2025. "Blockchain technology adoption mechanism for semiconductor chip supply chains considering information disclosure under cost-sharing contract," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    16. Michael Vössing & Niklas Kühl & Matteo Lind & Gerhard Satzger, 2022. "Designing Transparency for Effective Human-AI Collaboration," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 877-895, June.
    17. Abakah, Alex Annan, 2024. "Does social capital matter in underwriter's fees?," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    18. Lyudmyla Starostyuk & Kay-Yut Chen & Edmund L. Prater, 2023. "Do looks matter in supply chain contracting? An experimental study," Business Economics, Palgrave Macmillan;National Association for Business Economics, vol. 58(1), pages 9-23, January.
    19. Ines Gharbi & Mounira Hamed‐Sidhom & Khaled Hussainey & Janet Ganouati, 2021. "Religiosity and financial distress in U.S. firms," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 3902-3915, July.
    20. Croux, Christophe & Jagtiani, Julapa & Korivi, Tarunsai & Vulanovic, Milos, 2020. "Important factors determining Fintech loan default: Evidence from a lendingclub consumer platform," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 270-296.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:safewp:334511. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csafede.html .

    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.