Explainable AI and public reactions to AI-involved adverse diagnostic events: a vignette study

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly incorporated into diagnostic decision-making, raising questions about physician responsibility following AI-involved adverse diagnostic events. Explainable AI (XAI) has been proposed to improve transparency and trust, but its influence on public reactions remains unclear. In a randomised vignette-based experiment, 652 adults from the United States and United Kingdom were assigned to one of six conditions in a 3 (diagnostic source: AI alone, human radiologist alone, or human-AI collaboration) x 2 (explanation: present or absent) between-subjects design. Participants read a scenario in which a chest X-ray was initially interpreted as normal but lung cancer was diagnosed five months later, indicating that the original interpretation had missed the cancer. In explanation conditions, participants received additional information about how the diagnosis had been reached, including AI heatmap-based explanations in the AI conditions. Participants rated radiologist responsibility, likelihood of complaint, and intention to pursue legal action. Among 652 participants (mean age 42.2 years; 50.2% female), responsibility ratings were significantly lower when AI alone made the diagnostic decision (mean 4.73, 95% CI 4.53-4.93) compared with human-only decision-making (5.78, 95% CI 5.59-5.98; p<0.001) and human-AI collaboration (5.54, 95% CI 5.34-5.74; p<0.001). Complaint likelihood showed a similar pattern. Intentions to pursue legal action followed the same directional trend but were marginally significant. Neither explanations nor explanation-by-source interactions were associated with outcome measures. These findings suggest that the public expects physicians to remain accountable when AI is involved in diagnostic decision-making, particularly in collaborative settings. Providing explanatory information about how AI systems reach decisions may be insufficient to change perceptions of physician responsibility following adverse diagnostic events.