AI is not careful: approach to the stock market and preference for AI advisor

IF 6.3 3区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS International Journal of Bank Marketing Pub Date : 2024-07-15 DOI:10.1108/ijbm-10-2023-0568
Jieun Koo
{"title":"AI is not careful: approach to the stock market and preference for AI advisor","authors":"Jieun Koo","doi":"10.1108/ijbm-10-2023-0568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>Financial institutions actively seek to leverage the capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI) across diverse operations in the field. Especially, the adoption of AI advisors has a significant impact on trading and investing in the stock market. The purpose of this paper is to test whether AI advisors are less preferred compared to human advisors for investing and whether this algorithm aversion diminishes for trading.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>The four hypotheses regarding the direct and indirect relationships between variables are tested in five experiments that collect data from Prolific.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The results of the five experiments reveal that, for investing, consumers are less likely to use AI advisors in comparison to human advisors. However, this reluctance to AI advisors decreases for trading. The author identifies the perceived importance of careful decision-making for investing and trading as the psychological mechanism. Specifically, the greater emphasis on careful decision-making in investing, as compared to trading, leads to consumers’ tendency to avoid AI advisors.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This research is the first to investigate whether algorithm aversion varies based on whether one’s approach to the stock market is investing or trading. Furthermore, it contributes to the literature on carefulness by exploring the interaction between a stock market approach and the lay belief that algorithms lack the capability to deliberate carefully.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":51401,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Bank Marketing","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Bank Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijbm-10-2023-0568","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Financial institutions actively seek to leverage the capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI) across diverse operations in the field. Especially, the adoption of AI advisors has a significant impact on trading and investing in the stock market. The purpose of this paper is to test whether AI advisors are less preferred compared to human advisors for investing and whether this algorithm aversion diminishes for trading.

Design/methodology/approach

The four hypotheses regarding the direct and indirect relationships between variables are tested in five experiments that collect data from Prolific.

Findings

The results of the five experiments reveal that, for investing, consumers are less likely to use AI advisors in comparison to human advisors. However, this reluctance to AI advisors decreases for trading. The author identifies the perceived importance of careful decision-making for investing and trading as the psychological mechanism. Specifically, the greater emphasis on careful decision-making in investing, as compared to trading, leads to consumers’ tendency to avoid AI advisors.

Originality/value

This research is the first to investigate whether algorithm aversion varies based on whether one’s approach to the stock market is investing or trading. Furthermore, it contributes to the literature on carefulness by exploring the interaction between a stock market approach and the lay belief that algorithms lack the capability to deliberate carefully.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人工智能并不谨慎:对股市的态度和对人工智能顾问的偏好
目的金融机构积极寻求利用人工智能(AI)的能力来开展各种业务。特别是,人工智能顾问的采用对股票市场的交易和投资产生了重大影响。本文旨在测试在投资方面,人工智能顾问是否不如人类顾问更受欢迎,以及在交易方面,这种对算法的厌恶是否会减弱。设计/方法/途径通过从 Prolific 收集数据的五个实验,对变量间直接和间接关系的四个假设进行了测试。然而,在交易中,消费者对人工智能顾问的不情愿程度有所降低。作者认为,在投资和交易中,谨慎决策的重要性是消费者的心理机制。具体来说,与交易相比,投资更强调谨慎决策,这导致消费者倾向于回避人工智能顾问。此外,该研究还探讨了股市投资方式与普通人认为算法缺乏仔细斟酌能力之间的互动关系,从而为有关仔细程度的文献做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
18.90%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: International Journal of Bank Marketing (IJBM) aims to publish papers that relate to the marketing challenges of financial services providers around the globe. Preference is given to empirically-based research papers that expand on existing theories (or develop new ones) on customer behaviour in financial services settings. In addition, the journal is interested in helping academicians and practitioners in the field to better understand the discipline of financial services marketing, and as a result review papers and thought pieces are invited for submission.
期刊最新文献
Determinants of tweens’ saving intentions: a cross-sectional study What drives problematic Bitcoin investment behavior?: The role of financial literacy Dynamics of personal financial management: a bibliometric and systematic review on financial literacy, financial capability and financial behavior The augmenting role of digital banking in reconstructing women's economic empowerment Does leadership humility foster salesperson creativity? The serial mediating role of job satisfaction and knowledge sharing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1