Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Do patients trust computers

Bibliographic Data

ID12166229
AuthorsMarianne Promberger (California University of Pennsylvania, corresponding author), Jonathan Baron (0000-0003-1001-9947, California University of Pennsylvania)
Year2006
Volume19
Issue5
Pages455-468
Publication date2006-11-24
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Behavioral Decision Making (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0894-3257 • E-ISSN: 1099-0771
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/bdm.542
OpenAlexW2070125214
LanguageEN
Citations received42
References cited30

In two studies, we inquired whether patients accept medical recommendations that come from a computer program rather than from a physician. In study 1, we found that subjects, when deciding whether to have an operation or not in different medical scenarios, were more likely to follow a recommendation that came from a physician than one that came from a computer program. Subjects stated that they would feel less responsible when following a recommendation than when deciding against it. Following a physician's recommendation reduced the feeling of responsibility more than following that of a computer program. The difference in feeling of responsibility when following versus when not following a recommendation partly mediated subjects' inclination to follow the physician more. In our second study, we found that subjects were more decision seeking when they received a recommendation or decision from a computer program, and they were more decision seeking when they had to accept a decision than when they received a recommendation. Subjects also trusted the physician more than the computer program to make a good recommendation or decision. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Family medicine · Feeling · Medical decision making · Medical education · Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills · Computer Science · Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics · Medicine · Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare · Psychology · Social Psychology

  • The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making

    Open Access•Valerio Capraro, Austin Lentsch et al.•PNAS Nexus•2024

  • Task-Dependent Algorithm Aversion

    Open Access•Noah Castelo, Maarten W Bos et al.•Journal of Marketing Research•2019

  • My Friends, Editors, Algorithms, and I

    Neil Thurman, Judith Moeller et al.•Digital Journalism•2019

  • Algorithm appreciation

    Open Access•Jennifer M Logg, Julia A Minson et al.•Organizational Behavior and Human…•2019

  • Do We Trust Artificially Intelligent Assistants at Work? An Experimental Study

    Open Access•Anica Cvetkovic, Nina Savela et al.•Human Behavior and Emerging…•2024

  • Students’ acceptance on computer-adaptive testing for achievement assessment in Japanese elementary and secondary school

    Open Access•Takayuki Goto, Kei Kano et al.•Frontiers in Education•2023

  • Investigating lay evaluations of models

    Patrick Bodilly Kane, Stephen B Broomell•Thinking & Reasoning•2022

  • Birds of a feather? How perceived similarity shapes responses to AI versus human health messages

    Open Access•Buduo Wang, Xiaobei Chen et al.•Communication Research Reports•2026

  • AI as a moral crumple zone

    Open Access•Jess Hohenstein, Malte Jung•Computers in Human Behavior•2020

  • When humans and computers induce social stress through negative feedback

    Open Access•Simon Thuillard, M Adams et al.•Computers in Human Behavior•2022

  • To err is human, not algorithmic – Robust reactions to erring algorithms

    Open Access•Laetitia A Renier, Marianne Schmid Mast et al.•Computers in Human Behavior•2021

  • Gain-loss separability in human- but not computer-based changes of mind

    Open Access•Yongling Lin, Pengfei Xu et al.•Computers in Human Behavior•2023

  • Let me decide

    Open Access•Lior Fink, Leorre Newman et al.•Computers in Human Behavior•2024

  • The future of artificial intelligence at work

    Open Access•Markus Langer, Richard N Landers•Computers in Human Behavior•2021

  • Applicants’ Fairness Perceptions of Algorithm-Driven Hiring Procedures

    Open Access•Maude Lavanchy, Patrick Reichert et al.•Journal of Business Ethics•2023

  • Biased Humans, (Un)Biased Algorithms

    Open Access•Florian Pethig, Julia Kroenung•Journal of Business Ethics•2023

  • The effect of medical artificial intelligence innovation locus on consumer adoption of new products

    Open Access•Xiaozhi Huang, Xitong Wu et al.•Technological Forecasting and…•2023

  • Managerial overreliance on AI-augmented decision-making processes

    Open Access•Christoph Keding, Philip Meissner•Technological Forecasting and…•2021

  • What influences algorithmic decision-making? A systematic literature review on algorithm aversion

    Open Access•Hasan Mahmud, A K M Najmul Islam et al.•Technological Forecasting and…•2022

  • Black Box Warfare

    Open Access•Ryan Shandler, M L Gro et al.•Journal of Conflict Resolution•2026

  • Americans’ views of artificial intelligence

    Open Access•Will Livingston•AI & Society•2025

  • The ABC of algorithmic aversion

    Open Access•Gabi Schaap, Tibor Bosse et al.•AI & Society•2024

  • Put Yourself in My Shoes

    Open Access•Joshua L M Brand•Philosophy & Technology•2025

  • Trade-offs in AI assistant choice

    Open Access•Tomohiro Ioku, Jaehyun Song et al.•Big Data & Society•2024

  • The relative influence of advice from human experts and statistical methods on forecast adjustments

    Open Access•Dilek Önkal, Paul Goodwin et al.•Journal of Behavioral Decision…•2009

  • What People Want From Their Professionals

    Open Access•Joseph Eastwood, Brent Snook et al.•Journal of Behavioral Decision…•2011

  • Artificial intelligence innovation in healthcare

    Open Access•Ahmed Zahlan, Ravi Prakash Ranjan et al.•Technology in Society•2023

  • Machine Replacement

    Open Access•Kai Chi Yam, Alexander Eng et al.•Annual Review of Organizational…•2024

  • Counselor type (Human/AI) and consultation intention

    Open Access•Weizhong Zhang, Wei-zhong Zhang et al.•BMC Psychology•2025

  • The relevance internet users assign to algorithmic-selection applications in everyday life

    Open Access•Michael V Reiss, Noemi Festic et al.•Studies in Communication Sciences•2021

  • Artificial intelligence in medicine

    Open Access•Nadia Said, Lea Schumacher et al.•Journal of Risk Research•2025

  • Paging Dr. Jarvis! Will people accept advice from artificial intelligence for consequential risk management decisions

    Connor Larkin, Caitlin Drummond Otten et al.•Journal of Risk Research•2021

  • The Effect of Intuitive Advice Justification on Advice Taking

    Open Access•Stefanie C Tzioti, Berend Wierenga et al.•Journal of Behavioral Decision…•2013

  • A longitudinal approach for understanding algorithm use

    Open Access•Alvaro Chacon, Edgar E Kausel et al.•Journal of Behavioral Decision…•2022

  • Algorithms in selection decisions

    Open Access•Hagai Rabinovitch, David V Budescu et al.•Journal of Behavioral Decision…•2024

  • Beware the performance of an algorithm before relying on it

    Open Access•Tiffany Tsz Kwan Tse, Nobuyuki Hanaki et al.•Journal of Economic Psychology•2024

  • Misperception of Multiple Risks in Medical Decision-Making

    Open Access•Mehdi Mourali, Zhiyong Yang et al.•Journal of Consumer Research•2023

  • Explainability increases trust resilience in intelligent agents

    Open Access•Min Xu, Yiwen Wang•British Journal of Psychology•2024

  • Trust in AI vs. human doctors

    Open Access•Xiaotong Ding, Cai Xing•Acta Psychologica•2025

  • Same, same, but different! Qualitative evidence on how algorithmic selection applications govern different life domains

    Open Access•Noemi Festic•Regulation & Governance•2022

  • Understanding, explaining, and utilizing medical artificial intelligence

    Open Access•Romain Cadario, Chiara Longoni et al.•Nature Human Behaviour•2021

  • Resistance to Medical Artificial Intelligence

    Open Access•Chiara Longoni, Andrea Bonezzi et al.•Journal of Consumer Research•2019

  • Clinical versus statistical prediction

    Paul E Meehl•1954

  • Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions

    Open Access•A M O'Connor, A Rostom et al.•BMJ•1999

  • Clinical Versus Actuarial Judgment

    Open Access•Robyn M Dawes, David Faust et al.•Science•1989

  • A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects.

    David P Mackinnon, Chondra M Lockwood et al.•Psychological Methods•2002

  • Psychological determinants of decision attitude

    Open Access•Jane Beattie, Jane M Beattie et al.•Journal of Behavioral Decision…•1994

  • The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research

    Reuben M Baron, D A Kenny•Journal of Personality and Social…•1986

  • The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research

    Reuben M Baron, D A Kenny•Journal of Personality and Social…•1986

Unique citing works42
Citations per year2,47
Citation span2009 - 2026 (18)
Citation velocitycurrent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 42

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae