Give Me a Choice: The Consequences of Restricting Choices Through AI-Support for Perceived Autonomy, Motivational Variables, and Decision Performance
<|reference_start|>Give Me a Choice: The Consequences of Restricting Choices Through AI-Support for Perceived Autonomy, Motivational Variables, and Decision Performance: Design optimizations in human-AI collaboration often focus on cognitive aspects like attention and task load. Drawing on work design literature, we propose that effective human-AI collaboration requires broader consideration of human needs (e.g., autonomy) that affect motivational variables (e.g., meaningfulness). In a simulated drone oversight experiment, participants (N=274, between-subject) faced 10 critical decision-making scenarios with varying levels of choice restrictions with an AI recommending only 1, 2, 4 or all 6 possible actions. Restricting participants to one selectable action improved task performance (with a perfect AI) but significantly reduced perceived autonomy and work meaningfulness, and these effects intensified over time. In conditions with multiple action choices, participants with higher perceived autonomy performed better. The findings underscore the importance of considering motivational factors to design successful long-term human-AI collaboration at work.<|reference_end|>
@article{faas2024give,
    title={Give Me a Choice: The Consequences of Restricting Choices Through
  AI-Support for Perceived Autonomy, Motivational Variables, and Decision
  Performance},
    author={Cedric Faas, Richard Bergs, Sarah Sterz, Markus Langer, Anna Maria
  Feit},
    journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.07728},
    year={2024},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    eprint={2410.07728},
    primaryClass={cs.HC}
}