Jove
Visualize
联系我们
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
关于 JoVE
概览领导团队博客JoVE 帮助中心
作者
出版流程编辑委员会范围与政策同行评审常见问题投稿
图书馆员
用户评价订阅访问资源图书馆顾问委员会常见问题
研究
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments存档
教育
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab Manual教师资源中心教师网站
使用条款与条件
隐私政策
政策

相关概念视频

Fundamental Attribution Error01:14

Fundamental Attribution Error

12.8K
According to some social psychologists, people tend to overemphasize internal factors as explanations—or attributions—for the behavior of other people. They tend to assume that the behavior of another person is a trait of that person, and to underestimate the power of the situation on the behavior of others. They tend to fail to recognize when the behavior of another is due to situational variables, and thus to the person’s state. This erroneous assumption is...
12.8K
Hindsight Biases01:12

Hindsight Biases

3.4K
Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Can you relate this to the phrase "Hindsight is 20/20" now? 
3.4K
The Availability Heuristic01:08

The Availability Heuristic

5.9K
A heuristic is a general problem-solving framework (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). You can think of these as mental shortcuts that are used to solve problems. Different types of heuristics are used in different types of situations, and the impulse to use a heuristic occurs when one of five conditions is met (Pratkanis, 1989):
5.9K
Cause and Effect01:53

Cause and Effect

10.9K
While variables are sometimes correlated because one does cause the other, it could also be that some other factor, a confounding variable, is actually causing the systematic movement in our variables of interest. For instance, as sales in ice cream increase, so does the overall rate of crime. Is it possible that indulging in your favorite flavor of ice cream could send you on a crime spree? Or, after committing crime do you think you might decide to treat yourself to a cone?
10.9K
Reason and Intuition01:37

Reason and Intuition

6.4K
The human brain processes information for decision-making using one of two routes: an intuitive system and a rational system (Epstein, 1994; popularized by Kahneman, 2011 as System 1 and System 2, respectively). The intuitive system is quick, impulsive, and operates with minimal effort, relying on emotions or habits to provide cues for what to do next, while the rational system is logical, analytical, deliberate, and methodical. Research in neuropsychology suggests that the...
6.4K
Attribution Theory00:56

Attribution Theory

12.9K
Behavior is a product of both the situation (e.g., cultural influences, social roles, and the presence of bystanders) and of the person (e.g., personality characteristics). Subfields of psychology tend to focus on one influence or behavior over others. Situationism is the view that our behavior and actions are determined by our immediate environment and surroundings. In contrast, dispositionism holds that our behavior is determined by internal factors (Heider, 1958).
12.9K

您也可能阅读

相关文章

通过共同作者、期刊和引用图与本文相关的文章。

排序
Same author

How Downward Comparisons Impact Pro-Environmental Consumption: Mediating Roles of Self-Evaluations and Self-Awareness.

International journal of psychology : Journal international de psychologie·2025
Same author

Inter-brain synchronization is weakened by the introduction of external punishment.

Social cognitive and affective neuroscience·2021
Same author

Neuro-Behavioral Dynamic Prediction of Interpersonal Cooperation and Aggression.

Neuroscience bulletin·2021
Same author

Effortless retaliation: the neural dynamics of interpersonal intentions in the Chicken Game using brain-computer interface.

Social cognitive and affective neuroscience·2021

相关实验视频

Updated: Jun 9, 2025

Characterization of the Sense of Agency over the Actions of Neural-machine Interface-operated Prostheses
05:21

Characterization of the Sense of Agency over the Actions of Neural-machine Interface-operated Prostheses

Published on: January 7, 2019

7.9K

可解释性增加了智能代理人的信任弹性.

Min Xu1, Yiwen Wang2

  • 1School of Economics and Management, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou, China.

British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953)
|October 21, 2024
PubMed
概括
此摘要是机器生成的。

可解释AI (XAI) 帮助用户在发生错误后也信任人工智能 (AI) 系统. 通过减少决策后悔,XAI减轻了算法厌恶,鼓励继续使用AI.

关键词:
算法厌恶是一种算法.可解释的人工智能人与人工智能的互动.在信任信任信任信任信任信任.用户体验用户体验

更多相关视频

The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm
06:18

The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm

Published on: October 20, 2022

2.0K
Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies
05:22

Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: May 9, 2019

5.3K

相关实验视频

Last Updated: Jun 9, 2025

Characterization of the Sense of Agency over the Actions of Neural-machine Interface-operated Prostheses
05:21

Characterization of the Sense of Agency over the Actions of Neural-machine Interface-operated Prostheses

Published on: January 7, 2019

7.9K
The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm
06:18

The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm

Published on: October 20, 2022

2.0K
Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies
05:22

Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: May 9, 2019

5.3K

科学领域:

  • 人与计算机的交互
  • 人工智能伦理学 人工智能伦理学
  • 认知心理学 认知心理学

背景情况:

  • 人工智能 (AI) 系统通常表现优于人类,但容易出错.
  • 人工智能错误可能导致算法厌恶,减少用户的信任和未来的使用.
  • 可解释的人工智能 (XAI) 旨在使人工智能决策对用户透明.

研究的目的:

  • 调查可解释的人工智能 (XAI) 是否可以抵消算法厌恶.
  • 检查XAI对用户愿意在错误后继续使用AI的影响.

主要方法:

  • 为了评估用户行为,进行了两项实验.
  • 参与者与人工智能系统进行了互动,有些有XAI解释,有些没有,在观察AI错误后.

主要成果:

  • 在发现错误后,用户倾向于遵循AI建议的倾向下降.
  • XAI显著缓解了这种下降,增加了用户重新使用AI系统的可能性.
  • XAI减少了用户的决策遗憾,这影响了重复使用行为.

结论:

  • 可解释AI (XAI) 是对抗算法厌恶的有效策略.
  • XAI有助于维护用户的信任,并鼓励继续使用AI系统,尽管存在缺陷.
  • 减少决策后悔是XAI促进与AI重新接触的关键机制.