Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
144 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Designing Human-AI Systems: Anthropomorphism and Framing Bias on Human-AI Collaboration (2404.00634v2)

Published 31 Mar 2024 in cs.HC

Abstract: AI is redefining how humans interact with technology, leading to a synergetic collaboration between the two. Nevertheless, the effects of human cognition on this collaboration remain unclear. This study investigates the implications of two cognitive biases, anthropomorphism and framing effect, on human-AI collaboration within a hiring setting. Subjects were asked to select job candidates with the help of an AI-powered recommendation tool. The tool was manipulated in a 3 x 3 between-subjects design to present three different AI identities (human-like, robot-like, generic) and three types of framing (positive, negative, and neutral). The results revealed that the framing of AI's recommendations had no significant influence on subjects' decisions. In contrast, anthropomorphism significantly affected subjects' agreement with AI recommendations. Subjects were less likely to agree with the AI if it had human-like characteristics. These findings demonstrate that cognitive biases can impact human-AI collaboration and highlight the need for tailored approaches to AI product design, rather than a single, universal solution.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (64)
  1. Arkes, H. R. (1991). Costs and benefits of judgment errors: Implications for debiasing. Psychological Bulletin, 110(3):486–498.
  2. Fair pipelines. arXiv:1707.00391 [cs, stat].
  3. Factors that influence reliance on decision aids: a model and an experiment. Journal of Information Systems, 12:75–94.
  4. Message processing in realistic recruitment practices. Journal of Managerial Issues, 15(3):302–316.
  5. Anthropomorphism of AI based chatbots by users during communication. In 2023 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Technologies (CONIT), pages 1–6, Hubli, India. IEEE.
  6. Dacey, M. (2017). Anthropomorphism as cognitive bias. Philosophy of Science, 84(5):1152–1164.
  7. Dastin, J. (2018). Amazon scraps secret AI recruiting tool that showed bias against women. Reuters. Retrieved December 26, 2023, from https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1MK0AG/.
  8. Contextual effects on escalation processes in public sector decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37(1):121–138.
  9. Almost human: Anthropomorphism increases trust resilience in cognitive agents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22(3):331–349.
  10. Dhimant, G. (2020). Campus Recruitment. Retrieved October 26, 2023, from https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/benroshan/factors-affecting-campus-placement.
  11. Framing the problem and making decisions: The facts are not enough. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 36(1):25–27.
  12. Duffy, B. R. (2003). Anthropomorphism and the social robot. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3-4):177–190.
  13. Dunegan, K. J. (1993). Framing, cognitive modes, and image theory: Toward an understanding of a glass half full. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(3):491–503.
  14. Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3):223–241.
  15. AI and recruiting software: Ethical and legal implications. Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics, 11(1):199–216.
  16. When not to accentuate the positive: Re-examining valence effects in attribute framing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 124(2):95–109.
  17. Frisch, D. (1993). Reasons for framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54(3):399–429.
  18. Team situation awareness in human-autonomy teaming: A systems level approach. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 62(1):149–149.
  19. A brief history of heuristics: How did research on heuristics evolve? Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1):64.
  20. The heuristics and biases of top managers: Past, present, and future. Journal of Management Studies, 60(5):1033–1063.
  21. Trust in automation: Integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 57(3):407–434.
  22. Framing, decision-aid systems, and culture: Exploring influences on fraud investigations. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 13(4):316–333.
  23. Ethics of AI-Enabled Recruiting and Selection: A Review and Research Agenda. Journal of Business Ethics, 178(4):977–1007.
  24. Jarrahi, M. H. (2018). Artificial intelligence and the future of work: Human-AI symbiosis in organizational decision making. Business Horizons, 61(4):577–586.
  25. How consumers are affected by product descriptions in online shopping: Event-related potentials evidence of the attribute framing effect. Neuroscience Research, 125:21–28.
  26. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Pages: 499.
  27. Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., and Kahneman, D., editors, Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment, pages 49–81. Cambridge University Press, 1 edition.
  28. Building shared mental models between humans and AI for effective collaboration. In CHI’19, May 2019, Glasgow, Scotland.
  29. Where AI can - and can’t - help talent management. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved November 28, 2023, from https://hbr.org/2022/10/where-ai-can-and-cant-help-talent-management.
  30. Kirk, R. E. (2009). Experimental design. In Millsap, R. and Maydeu-Olivares, A., editors, The SAGE Handbook of Quantitative Methods in Psychology, pages 23–46. SAGE Publications Ltd.
  31. The Role of Attention in Attribute Framing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 31(3):392–401. _eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/bdm.2067.
  32. “Alive” or “not dead”: The contribution of descriptors to attribute-framing bias. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72(12):2776–2787.
  33. The dynamics of anthropomorphism in robotics. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, HRI ’14, pages 226–227, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery. event-place: Bielefeld, Germany.
  34. The role of inference in attribute framing effects. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30(5):1147–1156.
  35. Levin, I. P. (1987a). Associative effects of information framing. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 25(2):85–86.
  36. Levin, I. P. (1987b). Associative effects of information framing on human judgments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association.
  37. All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(2):149–188.
  38. Trust in artificial intelligence: From a Foundational Trust Framework to emerging research opportunities. Electronic Markets, 32(4):1993–2020.
  39. Miranda Bogen and Aaron Rieke (2018). Help wanted: An examination of hiring algorithms, equity, and bias. Technical report, Upturn.
  40. Mori, M. (1970). The uncanny valley. Energy, 7:33–35.
  41. How perceptions of intelligence and anthropomorphism affect adoption of personal intelligent agents. Electronic Markets, 31(2):343–364.
  42. Heuristics: Tools for an uncertain world. In Scott, R. A. and Kosslyn, S. M., editors, Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences: An interdisciplinary, searchable, and linkable resource, pages 1–18. Wiley, 1 edition.
  43. OpenAI (2022). Introducing ChatGPT. Retrieved October 30, 2023, from https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt.
  44. Decision support aids with anthropomorphic characteristics influence trust and performance in younger and older adults. Ergonomics, 55(9):1059–1072.
  45. R. Chow, A. (2023). How ChatGPT managed to grow faster than TikTok or Instagram. Time. Retrieved November 22, 2023, from https://time.com/6253615/chatgpt-fastest-growing/.
  46. Deciding fast and slow: The role of cognitive biases in AI-assisted decision-making. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 6(CSCW1):1–22.
  47. Estimating the impact of “humanizing” customer service chatbots. Information Systems Research, 32(3):736–751.
  48. Selection decision-making. In Boxall, P., Purcell, J., and Wright, P., editors, The Oxford Handbook of Human Resource Management, pages 300–323. Oxford University Press.
  49. Shneiderman, B. (2020). Bridging the Gap Between Ethics and Practice: Guidelines for Reliable, Safe, and Trustworthy Human-centered AI Systems. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems, 10(4):1–31.
  50. Correction: AI-based chatbots in conversational commerce and their effects on product and price perceptions. Electronic Markets, 33(1):44.
  51. Human and algorithmic decision-making in the personnel selection process: A comparative bibliometric on bias. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 17(1):175–189.
  52. Digital Coworker: Human-AI Collaboration in Work Environment, on the Example of Virtual Assistants for Management Professions. In Digital Transformation of Collaboration: Proceedings of the 9th International COINs Conference, Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Springer International Publishing, Cham.
  53. Cobots in knowledge work: Human-AI collaboration in managerial professions. Journal of Business Research, 125:135–142.
  54. Do we trust in AI? Role of anthropomorphism and intelligence. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 61(5):481–491.
  55. Belief in the law of small numbers. Psychological Bulletin, 76(2):105–110.
  56. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185:1124–1131.
  57. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481):453–458.
  58. Factors that influence new generation candidates to engage with and complete digital, AI-enabled recruiting. Business Horizons, 62(6):729–739.
  59. From human-human collaboration to human-AI collaboration: Designing AI systems that can work together with people. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1–6, Honolulu HI USA. ACM.
  60. The mind in the machine: Anthropomorphism increases trust in an autonomous vehicle. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 52:113–117.
  61. Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis. In Mooney, R., Brew, C., Chien, L.-F., and Kirchhoff, K., editors, Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 347–354, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  62. Xu, W. (2019). Toward human-centered AI: a perspective from human-computer interaction. Interactions, 26(4):42–46.
  63. Anthropomorphism and customers’ willingness to use artificial intelligence service agents. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 31(1):1–23.
  64. Algorithmic equity in the hiring of underrepresented IT job candidates. Online Information Review, 44(2):383–395.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now