Automation bias and verification complexity: a systematic review
By David Lyell, Enrico W. Coiera. J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc., 2017
304 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Family Practice, Social Psychology, Surgery
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a970ea78ddcc7e0c2b047312c04a15a0c57ac4e7
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Family Practice
In Social Psychology
In Surgery
Citations in the corpus
- Ensuring Fairness in Machine Learning to Advance Health Equity (2018, background): “African American patients might be harmed if clinical teams started relying on alerts to identify at-risk patients without realizing that the prediction system underdetects patients in that group (automation bias) (16).”
- Evaluation and mitigation of the limitations of large language models in clinical decision-making (2024, unknown): “Importantly, studies as to the impact of automation bias 53,54 and human– AI interaction biases could also be explored in such a context 55–57 .”
- Accountable Artificial Intelligence: Holding Algorithms to Account (2020, background): “…algorithmic outputs could conceivably lead to unjustified deference of the decision-maker to algorithm predictions: “Automation bias” (Cummings 2006; Lyell and Coiera 2017; Skitka, Mosier, and Burdick 1999) is a well-documented phenomenon reported in psychological studies manifest in human…”
- Artificial Intelligence and the Implementation Challenge (2019, background): “The implementation of decision support systems in health care that do not include applications of ML have been well studied and the difficulties include perceived challenges to autonomy, lack of time, and dissatisfaction with user interfaces [27,28].”
- Human-AI Interactions in Public Sector Decision-Making:"Automation Bias"and"Selective Adherence"to Algorithmic Advice (2021, background): “…words, the potential of digital tools to “influence or replace human judgment” in public service provision (Busch and Hendriksen 2018, 4) and to alter the very nature of public managers’ work (Kim, Andersen, and Lee 2021) and bureaucratic structures and routines (Meijer, Lorenz, and Wessels 2021).”