From the hash-bound evidence releases
Recorded claims
Each claim states what the inspected source says, at the recorded location—bounded by its scope and graded by its confidence. Nothing here is a synthesis across works.
In a laboratory experiment with 288 participants making repeated housing-price predictions, the abstract distinguishes learning from AI from learning about AI and reports that transparent sparse models favored the former, while black-box or more complex transparent models reduced inappropriate discounting of AI advice; the study period is not stated.
Scope: N=288 participants in repeated housing-price predictions; condition denominators, trial count, recruitment universe, and observation period are not reported on the abstract page
Structured relationships
In-corpus citations
Only source-supplied cites relationships whose two endpoints are admitted are shown. Invocation evidence remains a separate relationship.
Cites (0)
No in-corpus outgoing citation is available in the current enrichment coverage.
Cited by (0)
No in-corpus incoming citation is available in the current enrichment coverage.
Boundaries
Limitations & independence
Recorded at coding time, carried with the work forever. A claim without its limits is not evidence.
Recorded limitations
- Abstract-level evidence only; full text and PDFs were not inspected.
- The abstract gives total N=288 but not condition denominators, recruitment universe, experimental period, number of predictions, attrition, effect sizes, confidence intervals, test statistics, or p-values.
- The page reports that optimal design differs by prior decision-making ability, so transparency and black-box findings should not be collapsed into one general effect.
Source independence
ssrn-only