Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Guidance Source Matters: How Guidance from AI, Expert, or a Group of Analysts Impacts Visual Data Preparation and Analysis

  • Arpit Narechania*
  • , Alex Endert
  • , Atanu R. Sinha
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Conference Proceeding/ReportConference Paper published in a bookpeer-review

Abstract

The progress in generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) has fueled AI-powered tools like co-pilots and assistants to provision better guidance, particularly during data analysis. However, research on guidance has not yet examined the perceived efficacy of the source from which guidance is offered and the impact of this source on the user's perception and usage of guidance. We ask whether users perceive all guidance sources as equal, with particular interest in three sources: (i) "AI,"(ii) "human expert,"and (iii) "a group of human analysts."As a benchmark, we consider a fourth source, (iv) "unattributed guidance,"where guidance is provided without attribution to any source, enabling isolation of and comparison with the effects of source-specific guidance. We design a five-condition between-subjects study, with one condition for each of the four guidance sources and an additional (v) "no-guidance"condition, which serves as a baseline to evaluate the influence of any kind of guidance. We situate our study in a custom data preparation and analysis tool wherein we task users to select relevant attributes from an unfamiliar dataset to inform a business report. Depending on the assigned condition, users can request guidance, which the system then provides in the form of attribute suggestions. To ensure internal validity, we control for the quality of guidance across source-conditions. Through several metrics of usage and perception, we statistically test five preregistered hypotheses and report on additional analysis. We find that the source of guidance matters to users, but not in a manner that matches received wisdom. For instance, users utilize guidance differently at various stages of analysis, including expressing varying levels of regret, despite receiving guidance of similar quality. Notably, users in the AI condition reported both higher post-task benefit and regret. These findings strongly indicate the need to further understand how different guidance sources impact user behavior for designing effective guidance systems.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationIUI 2025 - Proceedings of the 2025 International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces
PublisherAssociation for Computing Machinery
Pages789-809
Number of pages21
ISBN (Electronic)9798400713064
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 24 Mar 2025
Externally publishedYes
Event30th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, IUI 2025 - Cagliari, Italy
Duration: 24 Mar 202527 Mar 2025

Publication series

NameInternational Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, Proceedings IUI

Conference

Conference30th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, IUI 2025
Country/TerritoryItaly
CityCagliari
Period24/03/2527/03/25

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 Copyright held by the owner/author(s).

Keywords

  • artificial intelligence
  • data preparation
  • groupthink
  • guidance
  • human expert
  • visual data analysis

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Guidance Source Matters: How Guidance from AI, Expert, or a Group of Analysts Impacts Visual Data Preparation and Analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this