{"title":"人们如何应对人工智能的失败?自动化偏差、算法厌恶和感知可控性","authors":"S Mo Jones-Jang, Yong Jin Park","doi":"10.1093/jcmc/zmac029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AI can make mistakes and cause unfavorable consequences. It is important to know how people react to such AI-driven negative consequences and subsequently evaluate the fairness of AI’s decisions. This study theorizes and empirically tests two psychological mechanisms that explain the process: (a) heuristic expectations of AI’s consistent performance (automation bias) and subsequent frustration of unfulfilled expectations (algorithmic aversion) and (b) heuristic perceptions of AI’s controllability over negative results. Our findings from two experimental studies reveal that these two mechanisms work in an opposite direction. First, participants tend to display more sensitive responses to AI’s inconsistent performance and thus make more punitive assessments of AI’s decision fairness, when compared to responses to human experts. Second, as participants perceive AI has less control over unfavorable outcomes than human experts, they are more tolerant in their assessments of AI.","PeriodicalId":48319,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication","volume":"151 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How do people react to AI failure? Automation bias, algorithmic aversion, and perceived controllability\",\"authors\":\"S Mo Jones-Jang, Yong Jin Park\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jcmc/zmac029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AI can make mistakes and cause unfavorable consequences. It is important to know how people react to such AI-driven negative consequences and subsequently evaluate the fairness of AI’s decisions. This study theorizes and empirically tests two psychological mechanisms that explain the process: (a) heuristic expectations of AI’s consistent performance (automation bias) and subsequent frustration of unfulfilled expectations (algorithmic aversion) and (b) heuristic perceptions of AI’s controllability over negative results. Our findings from two experimental studies reveal that these two mechanisms work in an opposite direction. First, participants tend to display more sensitive responses to AI’s inconsistent performance and thus make more punitive assessments of AI’s decision fairness, when compared to responses to human experts. Second, as participants perceive AI has less control over unfavorable outcomes than human experts, they are more tolerant in their assessments of AI.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48319,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication\",\"volume\":\"151 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmac029\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmac029","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
How do people react to AI failure? Automation bias, algorithmic aversion, and perceived controllability
AI can make mistakes and cause unfavorable consequences. It is important to know how people react to such AI-driven negative consequences and subsequently evaluate the fairness of AI’s decisions. This study theorizes and empirically tests two psychological mechanisms that explain the process: (a) heuristic expectations of AI’s consistent performance (automation bias) and subsequent frustration of unfulfilled expectations (algorithmic aversion) and (b) heuristic perceptions of AI’s controllability over negative results. Our findings from two experimental studies reveal that these two mechanisms work in an opposite direction. First, participants tend to display more sensitive responses to AI’s inconsistent performance and thus make more punitive assessments of AI’s decision fairness, when compared to responses to human experts. Second, as participants perceive AI has less control over unfavorable outcomes than human experts, they are more tolerant in their assessments of AI.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (JCMC) has been a longstanding contributor to the field of computer-mediated communication research. Since its inception in 1995, it has been a pioneer in web-based, peer-reviewed scholarly publications. JCMC encourages interdisciplinary research, welcoming contributions from various disciplines, such as communication, business, education, political science, sociology, psychology, media studies, and information science. The journal's commitment to open access and high-quality standards has solidified its status as a reputable source for scholars exploring the dynamics of communication in the digital age.