Human-in-the-loop (HITL) frameworks are increasingly recognized for their potential to improve annotation accuracy in emotion estimation systems by combining machine predictions with human expertise. This study focuses on integrating a high-performing image-based emotion model into a HITL annotation framework to evaluate the collaborative potential of human-machine interaction and identify the psychological and practical factors critical to successful collaboration. Specifically, we investigate how varying model reliability and cognitive framing influence human trust, cognitive load, and annotation behavior in HITL systems. We demonstrate that model reliability and psychological framing significantly impact annotators' trust, engagement, and consistency, offering insights into optimizing HITL frameworks. Through three experimental scenarios with 29 participants--baseline model reliability (S1), fabricated errors (S2), and cognitive bias introduced by negative framing (S3)--we analyzed behavioral and qualitative data. Reliable predictions in S1 yielded high trust and annotation consistency, while unreliable outputs in S2 led to increased critical evaluations but also heightened frustration and response variability. Negative framing in S3 revealed how cognitive bias influenced participants to perceive the model as more relatable and accurate, despite misinformation regarding its reliability. These findings highlight the importance of both reliable machine outputs and psychological factors in shaping effective human-machine collaboration. By leveraging the strengths of both human oversight and automated systems, this study establishes a scalable HITL framework for emotion annotation and lays the foundation for broader applications in adaptive learning and human-computer interaction.