Should I Share this Translation? Evaluating Quality Feedback for User Reliance on Machine Translation
Dayeon Ki, Kevin Duh, Marine Carpuat
Abstract
As people increasingly use AI systems in work and daily life, mechanisms that help them use AI responsibly are urgently needed, especially when they are not equipped to verify AI predictions themselves. We study a realistic Machine Translation (MT) scenario where monolingual users decide whether to share an MT output, first without and then with quality feedback. We compare four types of quality feedback: explicit feedback that directly give users an assessment of translation quality using (1) error highlights and (2) LLM explanations, and implicit feedback that helps users compare MT inputs and outputs through (3) backtranslation and ( 4 ) question-answer (QA) tables. We find that all feedback types, except error highlights, significantly improve both decision accuracy and appropriate reliance. Notably, implicit feedback, especially QA tables, yields significantly greater gains than explicit feedback in terms of decision accuracy, appropriate reliance, and user perceptions -receiving the highest ratings for helpfulness and trust, and the lowest for mental burden. 1
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on19
- To Trust or to Think: Cognitive Forcing Functions Can Reduce Overreliance on AI in AI-assisted Decision-makingZana Buçinca, Maja Barbara Malaya, Krzysztof Z. GajosCSCW 2021 · 962 citations
- Questioning the AI: Informing Design Practices for Explainable AI User ExperiencesQ. Vera Liao, Daniel M. Gruen, Sarah MillerCHI 2020 · 758 citations
- Does the Whole Exceed its Parts? The Effect of AI Explanations on Complementary Team PerformanceGagan Bansal, Tongshuang Wu, Joyce Zhou, Raymond Fok et al.CHI 2021 · 713 citations
- Manipulating and Measuring Model InterpretabilityForough Poursabzi-Sangdeh, Daniel G. Goldstein, Jake M. Hofman, Jennifer Wortman Vaughan et al.CHI 2021 · 663 citations
- How to Evaluate Trust in AI-Assisted Decision Making? A Survey of Empirical MethodologiesOleksandra Vereschak, Gilles Bailly, Baptiste CaramiauxCSCW 2021 · 227 citations
Related papers
- Physician Detection of Clinical Harm in Machine Translation: Quality Estimation Aids in Reliance and Backtranslation Identifies Critical ErrorsNikita Mehandru, Sweta Agrawal, Yimin Xiao, Ge Gao et al.EMNLP 2023 · 9 citations
- Toward Machine Translation Literacy: How Lay Users Perceive and Rely on Imperfect TranslationsYimin Xiao, Yongle Zhang, Dayeon Ki, Calvin Bao et al.EMNLP 2025
- Does Explainable Artificial Intelligence Improve Human Decision-Making?Yasmeen Alufaisan, Laura R. Marusich, Jonathan Z. Bakdash, Yan Zhou et al.AAAI 2021 · 135 citations
- Balancing Quality and Human Involvement: An Effective Approach to Interactive Neural Machine TranslationTianxiang Zhao, Lemao Liu, Guoping Huang, Huayang Li et al.AAAI 2020 · 21 citations
- Investigating the Helpfulness of Word-Level Quality Estimation for Post-Editing Machine Translation OutputRaksha Shenoy, Nico Herbig, Antonio Krüger, Josef van GenabithEMNLP 2021 · 3 citations
