Exploring the superiority of human expertise over algorithmic expertise in the cognitive and metacognitive processes of decision-making among decision-makers.

Abstract

Investigating the role of human vs algorithmic expertise on decision-making processes is crucial, especially in the public sector where it can impact millions of people. To better comprehend the underlying cognitive and metacognitive processes, we conducted an experiment to manipulate the influence of human and algorithmic agents on decision-makers' confidence levels. We also studied the resulting impact on decision outcomes and metacognitive awareness. By exploring a theoretical model of serial and interaction effects, we were able to manipulate the complexity and uncertainty of initial data and analyze the role of confidence in decision-making facing human or algorithmic expertise. Results showed that individuals tend to be more confident in their decision-making and less likely to revise their decisions when presented with consistent information. External expertise, whether from an expert or algorithmic analysis, can significantly impact decision outcomes, depending on whether it confirms or contradicts the initial decision. Also, human expertise proved to have a higher impact on decision outcomes than algorithmic expertise, which may demonstrate confirmation bias and other social processes that we further discuss. In conclusion, the study highlights the importance of adopting a holistic perspective in complex decision-making situations. Decision-makers must recognize their biases and the influence of external factors on their confidence and accountability.