Cargando…

Two distinct and separable processes underlie individual differences in algorithm adherence: Differences in predictions and differences in trust thresholds

Algorithms play an increasingly ubiquitous and vitally important role in modern society. However, recent findings suggest substantial individual variability in the degree to which people make use of such algorithmic systems, with some users preferring the advice of algorithms whereas others selectiv...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fenneman, Achiel, Sickmann, Joern, Pitz, Thomas, Sanfey, Alan G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7906384/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33630894
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247084
_version_ 1783655278255800320
author Fenneman, Achiel
Sickmann, Joern
Pitz, Thomas
Sanfey, Alan G.
author_facet Fenneman, Achiel
Sickmann, Joern
Pitz, Thomas
Sanfey, Alan G.
author_sort Fenneman, Achiel
collection PubMed
description Algorithms play an increasingly ubiquitous and vitally important role in modern society. However, recent findings suggest substantial individual variability in the degree to which people make use of such algorithmic systems, with some users preferring the advice of algorithms whereas others selectively avoid algorithmic systems. The mechanisms that give rise to these individual differences are currently poorly understood. Previous studies have suggested two possible effects that may underlie this variability: users may differ in their predictions of the efficacy of algorithmic systems, and/or in the relative thresholds they hold to place trust in these systems. Based on a novel judgment task with a large number of within-subject repetitions, here we report evidence that both mechanisms exert an effect on experimental participant’s degree of algorithm adherence, but, importantly, that these two mechanisms are independent from each-other. Furthermore, participants are more likely to place their trust in an algorithmically managed fund if their first exposure to the task was with an algorithmic manager. These findings open the door for future research into the mechanisms driving individual differences in algorithm adherence, and allow for novel interventions to increase adherence to algorithms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7906384
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79063842021-03-03 Two distinct and separable processes underlie individual differences in algorithm adherence: Differences in predictions and differences in trust thresholds Fenneman, Achiel Sickmann, Joern Pitz, Thomas Sanfey, Alan G. PLoS One Research Article Algorithms play an increasingly ubiquitous and vitally important role in modern society. However, recent findings suggest substantial individual variability in the degree to which people make use of such algorithmic systems, with some users preferring the advice of algorithms whereas others selectively avoid algorithmic systems. The mechanisms that give rise to these individual differences are currently poorly understood. Previous studies have suggested two possible effects that may underlie this variability: users may differ in their predictions of the efficacy of algorithmic systems, and/or in the relative thresholds they hold to place trust in these systems. Based on a novel judgment task with a large number of within-subject repetitions, here we report evidence that both mechanisms exert an effect on experimental participant’s degree of algorithm adherence, but, importantly, that these two mechanisms are independent from each-other. Furthermore, participants are more likely to place their trust in an algorithmically managed fund if their first exposure to the task was with an algorithmic manager. These findings open the door for future research into the mechanisms driving individual differences in algorithm adherence, and allow for novel interventions to increase adherence to algorithms. Public Library of Science 2021-02-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7906384/ /pubmed/33630894 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247084 Text en © 2021 Fenneman et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Fenneman, Achiel
Sickmann, Joern
Pitz, Thomas
Sanfey, Alan G.
Two distinct and separable processes underlie individual differences in algorithm adherence: Differences in predictions and differences in trust thresholds
title Two distinct and separable processes underlie individual differences in algorithm adherence: Differences in predictions and differences in trust thresholds
title_full Two distinct and separable processes underlie individual differences in algorithm adherence: Differences in predictions and differences in trust thresholds
title_fullStr Two distinct and separable processes underlie individual differences in algorithm adherence: Differences in predictions and differences in trust thresholds
title_full_unstemmed Two distinct and separable processes underlie individual differences in algorithm adherence: Differences in predictions and differences in trust thresholds
title_short Two distinct and separable processes underlie individual differences in algorithm adherence: Differences in predictions and differences in trust thresholds
title_sort two distinct and separable processes underlie individual differences in algorithm adherence: differences in predictions and differences in trust thresholds
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7906384/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33630894
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247084
work_keys_str_mv AT fennemanachiel twodistinctandseparableprocessesunderlieindividualdifferencesinalgorithmadherencedifferencesinpredictionsanddifferencesintrustthresholds
AT sickmannjoern twodistinctandseparableprocessesunderlieindividualdifferencesinalgorithmadherencedifferencesinpredictionsanddifferencesintrustthresholds
AT pitzthomas twodistinctandseparableprocessesunderlieindividualdifferencesinalgorithmadherencedifferencesinpredictionsanddifferencesintrustthresholds
AT sanfeyalang twodistinctandseparableprocessesunderlieindividualdifferencesinalgorithmadherencedifferencesinpredictionsanddifferencesintrustthresholds