"When Two Wrongs Don't Make a Right" - Examining Confirmation Bias and the Role of Time Pressure During Human-AI Collaboration in Computational Pathology
Emely Rosbach, Jonas Ammeling, Sebastian Krügel, Angelika Kießig, Alexis Fritz, Jonathan Ganz, Chloé Puget, Taryn A. Donovan, Andrea Klang, Maximilian C. Köller, Pompei Bolfa, Marco Tecilla
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI)-based decision support systems hold promise for enhancing diagnostic accuracy and efficiency in computational pathology. However, human-AI collaboration can introduce and amplify cognitive biases, such as confirmation bias caused by false confirmation when erroneous human opinions are reinforced by inaccurate AI output. This bias may worsen when time pressure, ubiquitously present in routine pathology, strains practitioners' cognitive resources. We quantified confirmation bias triggered by AI-induced false confirmation and examined the role of time constraints in a web-based experiment, where trained pathology experts (n=28) estimated tumor cell percentages. Our results suggest that AI integration may fuel confirmation bias, evidenced by a statistically significant positive linear-mixed-effects model coefficient linking AI recommendations mirroring flawed human judgment and alignment with system advice. Conversely, time pressure appeared to weaken this relationship. These findings highlight potential risks of AI use in healthcare and aim to support the safe integration of clinical decision support systems.
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.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext be34f766-7067-4000-843a-e730a2e512a3Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on6
- FCOS: Fully Convolutional One-Stage Object DetectionZhi Tian, Chunhua Shen, Hao Chen, Tong HeICCV 2019 · 6,042 citations
- 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
- Knowing About Knowing: An Illusion of Human Competence Can Hinder Appropriate Reliance on AI SystemsGaole He, Lucie Kuiper, Ujwal GadirajuCHI 2023 · 101 citations
- Assertiveness-based Agent Communication for a Personalized Medicine on Medical Imaging DiagnosisFrancisco Maria Calisto, João Gabriel de Matos Fernandes, Margarida Morais, Carlos Santiago et al.CHI 2023 · 94 citations
- "If I Had All the Time in the World": Ophthalmologists' Perceptions of Anchoring Bias Mitigation in Clinical AI SupportAnne Kathrine Petersen Bach, Trine Munch Nørgaard, Jens Christian Brok, Niels van BerkelCHI 2023 · 46 citations
Related papers
- Deciding Fast and Slow: The Role of Cognitive Biases in AI-assisted Decision-makingCharvi Rastogi, Yunfeng Zhang, Dennis Wei, Kush R. Varshney et al.CSCW 2022 · 184 citations
- Who is Trusted for a Second Opinion? Comparing Collective Advice from a Medical AI and Physicians in Biopsy Decisions After Mammography ScreeningHenrik H. J. Detjen, Lars Densky, Niklas von Kalckreuth, Marvin KopkaCHI 2025 · 12 citations
- AI Shall Have No Dominion: on How to Measure Technology Dominance in AI-supported Human decision-makingFederico Cabitza, Andrea Campagner, Riccardo Angius, Chiara Natali et al.CHI 2023 · 47 citations
- Designing for Appropriate Reliance: The Roles of AI Uncertainty Presentation, Initial User Decision, and User Demographics in AI-Assisted Decision-MakingShiye Cao, Anqi Liu, Chien-Ming HuangCSCW 2024 · 38 citations
- Ambiguity-aware AI Assistants for Medical Data AnalysisMike Schaekermann, Graeme Beaton, Elaheh Sanoubari, Andrew Lim et al.CHI 2020 · 45 citations
