Understanding algorithm aversion: When is advice from automation discounted?
By Andrew Prahl, L. M. Swol. 2017
260 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: General Decision Sciences, Management Science and Operations Research
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In General Decision Sciences
In Management Science and Operations Research
- Supriyo Chakraborty
- Jason Burton
- Mari-Klara Stein
- Mani B. Srivastava
- Alun David Preece
- Lance M. Kaplan
- Dave Braines
- Tina Blegind Jensen
Citations in the corpus
- Rapid Trust Calibration through Interpretable and Uncertainty-Aware AI (2020, background): “64 Other experiments have produced con-flicting results, suggesting that only expert forecasters are susceptible to algorithm aversion while lay users are more likely to trust algorithmic advice.”
- Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (2019, unknown): “And Prahl and Van Swol (2017) cite the paper as evidence that “humans are trusted more than computers” (p. 693).”
- A systematic review of algorithm aversion in augmented decision making (2019, methodology): “However, conflicting results exist in which competitive cash rewards did not lead to algorithm aversion (e.g., Prahl & Van Swol, 2017), as well as experiments where algorithm aversion persists in the absence of competitive economic incentivization (e.g., Önkal et al., 2009).”
- Algorithmic management in a work context (2021, background): “Algorithm aversion refers to people’s hesitance to use algorithmic results, usually after observing imperfect performance by algorithms; this can even occur in situations where the algorithm may outperform humans in certain accuracy measures (Dietvorst et al., 2016; Prahl and Van Swol, 2017).”