{{ block title }}Experiment Complete — Results{{ endblock }} {{ block content }}
You have completed all 5 rounds of the supplier selection experiment.
Your total compensation = participation fee + performance bonus (€ {{ performance_bonus }}). Payment will be processed after the session closes.
Δw = 0 means the team's choice matched the optimal recommendation every round. Higher values indicate greater cumulative deviation.
| Round | PA Choice | Team Decision | Optimal? | Δw (PA) | Δw (SA) | Congruence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| {{ r.round }} | {{ r.pa_choice }} | {{ r.sa_choice }} | {% if r.optimal %} ✓ {% else %} — {% endif %} | {{ r.dw_pa }} | {{ r.dw_sa }} | {{ r.congruence }} |
This study examined how AI transparency affects trust and decision-making in two-person procurement teams. Participants were randomly assigned to either a high-transparency (Glass Box) or low-transparency (Black Box) AI condition.
The AI recommendation system was a controlled simulation (Wizard of Oz design). In most sessions, the AI correctly identified the optimal supplier based on weighted scoring criteria. In some sessions, the AI's recommendation was intentionally imperfect to reflect the realistic limitations of AI systems.
Your data will be analysed in aggregate to understand how transparency shapes trust calibration and team decision alignment in human-AI collaboration.
You may now close this browser tab. Thank you for your contribution to this research.