In blockchain applications, transaction confirmation is often treated as usability friction to be minimized or removed. However, confirmation also marks the boundary between deliberation and irreversible commitment, suggesting it may play a functional role in human decision-making. To investigate this tension, we conducted an experiment using a blockchain-based Connect Four game with two interaction modes differing only in authorization flow: manual wallet confirmation (Confirmation Mode) versus auto-authorized delegation (Frictionless Mode). Although participants preferred Frictionless Mode and perceived better performance (N=109), objective performance was worse without confirmation in a counterbalanced deployment (Wave 2: win rate -11.8%, p=0.044; move quality -0.051, p=0.022). Analysis of canceled submissions suggests confirmation can enable pre-submission self-correction (N=66, p=0.005). These findings suggest that transaction confirmation can function as a cognitively meaningful checkpoint rather than mere usability friction, highlighting a trade-off between interaction smoothness and decision quality in irreversible blockchain interactions.

翻译：在区块链应用中，交易确认常被视为应最小化或消除的可用性摩擦。然而，确认也标志着审慎考量与不可逆承诺之间的边界，这表明其可能在人类决策中发挥功能性作用。为探究这一矛盾，我们基于区块链的"四子棋"游戏开展了一项实验，设计了两种仅在授权流程上存在差异的交互模式：手动钱包确认模式与自动授权委托模式。尽管参与者更偏好无摩擦模式并自认为表现更佳，但在平衡部署的实验中，无确认情况下的客观表现反而更差：胜率下降11.8%，落子质量降低0.051。对取消提交记录的分析表明，确认机制能够实现提交前的自我修正。这些发现揭示，交易确认可充当具有认知意义的检查点，而非单纯的可用性摩擦，这凸显了不可逆区块链交互中操作流畅度与决策质量之间的权衡关系。