scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

Algorithm aversion: people erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err.

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
This paper showed that people are especially averse to algorithmic forecasters after seeing them perform, even when they see them outperform a human forecaster, and that people more quickly lose confidence in algorithmic than human forecasters when they make the same mistake.
Abstract
Research shows that evidence-based algorithms more accurately predict the future than do human forecasters. Yet when forecasters are deciding whether to use a human forecaster or a statistical algorithm, they often choose the human forecaster. This phenomenon, which we call algorithm aversion, is costly, and it is important to understand its causes. We show that people are especially averse to algorithmic forecasters after seeing them perform, even when they see them outperform a human forecaster. This is because people more quickly lose confidence in algorithmic than human forecasters after seeing them make the same mistake. In 5 studies, participants either saw an algorithm make forecasts, a human make forecasts, both, or neither. They then decided whether to tie their incentives to the future predictions of the algorithm or the human. Participants who saw the algorithm perform were less confident in it, and less likely to choose it over an inferior human forecaster. This was true even among those who saw the algorithm outperform the human.

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Machine Learning: An Applied Econometric Approach

TL;DR: This work presents a way of thinking about machine learning that gives it its own place in the econometric toolbox, and aims to make them conceptually easier to use by providing a crisper understanding of how these algorithms work, where they excel, and where they can stumble.
Journal ArticleDOI

Brave new world: service robots in the frontline

TL;DR: In this paper, a conceptual approach that is rooted in the service, robotics and AI literature is used to explore the potential role service robots will play in the future and to advance a research agenda for service researchers.
Journal ArticleDOI

Human Decisions and Machine Predictions

TL;DR: While machine learning can be valuable, realizing this value requires integrating these tools into an economic framework: being clear about the link between predictions and decisions; specifying the scope of payoff functions; and constructing unbiased decision counterfactuals.
Journal ArticleDOI

Understanding perception of algorithmic decisions: Fairness, trust, and emotion in response to algorithmic management:

TL;DR: People's lay concepts of algorithmic versus human decisions in a management context are revealed and it is suggested that task characteristics matter in understanding people's experiences with algorithmic technologies.
Journal ArticleDOI

Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment

TL;DR: This article found that people tend to rely more on advice when they think it comes from an algorithm than from a person, and that this effect waned when: people chose between an algorithm's estimate and their own (versus an external advisor's; Experiment 3) and they had expertise in forecasting (Experiment 4).
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models

TL;DR: An overview of simple and multiple mediation is provided and three approaches that can be used to investigate indirect processes, as well as methods for contrasting two or more mediators within a single model are explored.
Journal ArticleDOI

Clinical versus actuarial judgment

TL;DR: Research comparing these two approaches to decision-making shows the actuarial method to be superior, factors underlying the greater accuracy of actuarial methods, sources of resistance to the scientific findings, and the benefits of increased reliance on actuarial approaches are discussed.
Journal ArticleDOI

The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making.

TL;DR: In this article, Dawes presented evidence that even such improper linear models are superior to clinical intuition when predicting a numerical criterion from numerical predictors, and showed that unit (i.e., equal) weighting is quite robust for making such predictions.
Journal ArticleDOI

Preference and belief: Ambiguity and competence in choice under uncertainty

TL;DR: This paper investigated the relation between judgments of probability and preferences between bets and found that people prefer betting on their own judgment over an equiprobable chance event when they consider themselves knowledgeable, but not otherwise.
Journal ArticleDOI

Clinical versus mechanical prediction: a meta-analysis.

TL;DR: A meta-analysis on studies of human health and behavior indicates that mechanical predictions of human behaviors are equal or superior to clinical prediction methods for a wide range of circumstances.
Related Papers (5)
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Q1. What contributions have the authors mentioned in the paper "Algorithm aversion: people erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err" ?

The authors show that people are especially averse to algorithmic forecasters after seeing them perform, even when they see them outperform a human forecaster. 

The authors look forward to future research investigating how algorithms ’ attributes affect algorithm aversion. This is the next ( and great ) challenge for future research. This suggests that there are other important drivers of algorithm aversion that the authors have not uncovered. 

Trending Questions (1)
Why people avoid AI when predicting something?

The provided paper does not specifically address why people avoid AI when predicting something. The paper focuses on algorithm aversion, which is the tendency for people to choose human forecasters over algorithms, even when the algorithms are more accurate.