Andreas Ostermaier
Biographic Data
| ID | 8940407 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Andreas Ostermaier |
| GIVEN NAMES | Andreas |
| FAMILY NAME | Ostermaier |
| SIGNATURE | OSTERMAIER A |
| AFFILIATIONS | University of Southern Denmark |
| ORCID | 0000-0001-9143-5103 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 4 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 0 |
| WORKS AS AUTHOR | 4 |
| WORKS AS EDITOR | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2019 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2024 |
| H-INDEX | 0 |
Do Good Intentions Pay Off? Employee Responses to Well-Intended Actions with Risky Outcomes
How does a subordinate react to the superior’s well-intended action when it is not certain that it will produce the intended outcome? The risk associated with the outcome creates moral wiggle room and thus poses a threat to the gift exchange between the superior and the subordinate. In a laboratory experiment, we first find that subordinates continue to reciprocate if the outcome risk is high. Second, however, subordinates’ response to a well-int…
Algorithms as partners in crime
The human in the loop is often advocated as a panacea against concerns about AI-powered machines, which increasingly take decisions of consequence in all realms of life. However, can we rely on humans to prevent unethical decisions by machines? We run online experiments modeling both the case where the machine serves as a corrective to the human and where the human serves as a corrective to the machine. Our results suggest that, in the former cas…
Zombies in the Loop? Humans Trust Untrustworthy AI-Advisors for Ethical Decisions
Departing from the claim that AI needs to be trustworthy, we find that ethical advice from an AI-powered algorithm is trusted even when its users know nothing about its training data and when they learn information about it that warrants distrust. We conducted online experiments where the subjects took the role of decision-makers who received advice from an algorithm on how to deal with an ethical dilemma. We manipulated the information about the…
Sabotage in Capital Budgeting
This study investigates the sabotage of investments in response to hurdle contracts as a means of formal control in capital budgeting. We conduct a laboratory experiment to examine factors that drive or inhibit sabotage. Sabotage occurs when the manager provides false information to prevent the firm from realizing a profitable investment, which is costly both for the manager and the firm. Our results show that managers sabotage investments to rec…
No prominent works on this page.
Sabotage in Capital Budgeting
This study investigates the sabotage of investments in response to hurdle contracts as a means of formal control in capital budgeting. We conduct a laboratory experiment to examine factors that drive or inhibit sabotage. Sabotage occurs when the manager provides false information to prevent the firm from realizing a profitable investment, which is costly both for the manager and the firm. Our results show that managers sabotage investments to rec…
Zombies in the Loop? Humans Trust Untrustworthy AI-Advisors for Ethical Decisions
Departing from the claim that AI needs to be trustworthy, we find that ethical advice from an AI-powered algorithm is trusted even when its users know nothing about its training data and when they learn information about it that warrants distrust. We conducted online experiments where the subjects took the role of decision-makers who received advice from an algorithm on how to deal with an ethical dilemma. We manipulated the information about the…
Algorithms as partners in crime
The human in the loop is often advocated as a panacea against concerns about AI-powered machines, which increasingly take decisions of consequence in all realms of life. However, can we rely on humans to prevent unethical decisions by machines? We run online experiments modeling both the case where the machine serves as a corrective to the human and where the human serves as a corrective to the machine. Our results suggest that, in the former cas…
Do Good Intentions Pay Off? Employee Responses to Well-Intended Actions with Risky Outcomes
How does a subordinate react to the superior’s well-intended action when it is not certain that it will produce the intended outcome? The risk associated with the outcome creates moral wiggle room and thus poses a threat to the gift exchange between the superior and the subordinate. In a laboratory experiment, we first find that subordinates continue to reciprocate if the outcome risk is high. Second, however, subordinates’ response to a well-int…
Psychology (4 works) · Business (3 works) · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (3 works) · Social Psychology (3 works) · Computer Science (2 works) · Economics (2 works) · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI (2 works) · Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies (2 works) · Microeconomics (2 works) · Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations (2 works)