The ABC of algorithmic aversion
Not agent, but benefits and control determine the acceptance of automated decision-making
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20396269 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Gabi Schaap (0000-0002-4661-701X, Radboud University Nijmegen, corresponding author), Tibor Bosse (0000-0003-4233-0406, Radboud University Nijmegen), Paul Hendriks Vettehen (0000-0001-9628-2476, Radboud University Nijmegen) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 39 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 1947-1960 |
| Publication date | 2024-08-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | AI & Society (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0951-5666 • E-ISSN: 1435-5655 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s00146-023-01649-6 |
| OpenAlex | W4361199953 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 10 |
| References cited | 56 |
While algorithmic decision-making (ADM) is projected to increase exponentially in the coming decades, the academic debate on whether people are ready to accept, trust, and use ADM as opposed to human decision-making is ongoing. The current research aims at reconciling conflicting findings on ‘algorithmic aversion’ in the literature. It does so by investigating algorithmic aversion while controlling for two important characteristics that are often associated with ADM: increased benefits (monetary and accuracy) and decreased user control. Across three high-powered ( N total = 1192), preregistered 2 (agent: algorithm/human) × 2 (benefits: high/low) × 2 (control: user control/no control) between-subjects experiments, and two domains (finance and dating), the results were quite consistent: there is little evidence for a default aversion against algorithms and in favor of human decision makers. Instead, users accept or reject decisions and decisional agents based on their predicted benefits and the ability to exercise control over the decision
Cognitive psychology · Economics · Expected utility hypothesis · Loss aversion · Mathematical economics · Microeconomics · Behavioral Health and Interventions · Computer Science · Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI · Psychology · Artificial Intelligence
Algorithms in selection decisions
After opening the black box
Trust and reliance on AI — An experimental study on the extent and costs of overreliance on AI
Inevitable challenges of autonomy
Is anthropomorphizing AI worth it? The role of hands-on experience in shaping advice uptake
How Does AI Disclosure Shape Trust? Unpacking the Role of Legitimacy
Social Status and the Moral Acceptance of Artificial Intelligence
Factors impacting stress in financial investment due to the use of artificial intelligence
Beyond algorithm aversion
The influence of terminology on use and preference in algorithmic systems
Bayesian Cognitive Modeling
Overcoming Algorithm Aversion
The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT)
Task-Dependent Algorithm Aversion
Born to choose
Trust in Automation
Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use
The extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT2)
Clinical Versus Actuarial Judgment
Technology acceptance model
Clinical versus mechanical prediction
Online Dating
Machine behaviour
People are averse to machines making moral decisions
Algorithm appreciation
Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement.
G*Power 3
User Acceptance of Information Technology
Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology
The reliability of a two-item scale
The Sense of Agency
Out with the Humans, in with the Machines
On Algorithmic Fairness in Medical Practice
In AI we trust? Perceptions about automated decision-making by artificial intelligence
Online dating system design and relational decision making
Rise of Machine Agency
Preference for human or algorithmic forecasting advice does not predict if and how it is used
Making sense of recommendations
Do patients trust computers
The relative influence of advice from human experts and statistical methods on forecast adjustments
The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursuits
Stand out of our Light
Personalization versus Customization
Resistance to Medical Artificial Intelligence
| Unique citing works | 10 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 5 |
| Citation span | 2024 - 2026 (3) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 7 |