R0044/2026-03-29/Q003/SRC03
Springer: "Exploring automation bias in human-AI collaboration: a review and implications for explainable AI" (2025)
Source
| Field |
Value |
| Title |
Exploring automation bias in human-AI collaboration: a review and implications for explainable AI |
| Publisher |
AI & Society (Springer Nature) |
| Author(s) |
Not fully extracted |
| Date |
2025 |
| URL |
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-025-02422-7 |
| Type |
Research paper (systematic review) |
Summary
| Dimension |
Rating |
| Reliability |
High |
| Relevance |
Medium |
| Bias: Missing data |
Low risk |
| Bias: Measurement |
N/A |
| Bias: Selective reporting |
Low risk |
| Bias: Randomization |
N/A — not an RCT |
| Bias: Protocol deviation |
N/A — not an RCT |
| Bias: COI/Funding |
Low risk |
Rationale
| Dimension |
Rationale |
| Reliability |
Systematic review of 35 peer-reviewed studies across cognitive psychology, human factors, HCI, and neuroscience. |
| Relevance |
Comprehensive automation bias review, but does NOT mention sycophancy — relevant as negative evidence for the vocabulary-bridging question. |
| Bias flags |
Low risk. Systematic methodology. |
| Evidence ID |
Summary |
| SRC03-E01 |
Comprehensive automation bias review (35 studies, 2015-2025) does not mention sycophancy — negative evidence for bridging |