让下一篇重要论文，不再错过。

原文摘要

This paper bridges the gap in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) research by comparatively assessing the effects of interpretability and outcome feedback on user trust and collaborative performance with AI. Through novel pre-registered experiments (N=1,511 total participants) using an interactive prediction task, we analyzed how interpretability and outcome feedback influence users' task performance and trust in AI. The results counter the widespread belief that interpretability drives trust, showing that interpretability led to no robust improvements in trust and that outcome feedback had a significantly greater and more reliable effect. However, both factors had modest effects on participants' task performance. These findings suggest that (1) interpretability may be less effective at increasing trust than factors like outcome feedback, and (2) augmenting human performance via AI systems may not be a simple matter of increasing trust in AI, as increased trust is not always associated with equally sizable performance improvements. Our exploratory analyses further delve into the mechanisms underlying this trust-performance paradox. These findings present an opportunity for research to focus not only on methods for generating interpretations but also on techniques that ensure interpretations impact trust and performance in practice.