Overcoming Algorithm Aversion: People Will Use Imperfect Algorithms If They Can (Even Slightly) Modify Them

Berkeley J. Dietvorst, J. Simmons, Cade Massey
{"title":"Overcoming Algorithm Aversion: People Will Use Imperfect Algorithms If They Can (Even Slightly) Modify Them","authors":"Berkeley J. Dietvorst, J. Simmons, Cade Massey","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2616787","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although evidence-based algorithms consistently outperform human forecasters, people often fail to use them after learning that they are imperfect, a phenomenon known as algorithm aversion. In this paper, we present three studies investigating how to reduce algorithm aversion. In incentivized forecasting tasks, participants chose between using their own forecasts or those of an algorithm that was built by experts. Participants were considerably more likely to choose to use an imperfect algorithm when they could modify its forecasts, and they performed better as a result. Notably, the preference for modifiable algorithms held even when participants were severely restricted in the modifications they could make (Studies 1-3). In fact, our results suggest that participants’ preference for modifiable algorithms was indicative of a desire for some control over the forecasting outcome, and not for a desire for greater control over the forecasting outcome, as participants’ preference for modifiable algorithms was relatively insensitive to the magnitude of the modifications they were able to make (Study 2). Additionally, we found that giving participants the freedom to modify an imperfect algorithm made them feel more satisfied with the forecasting process, more likely to believe that the algorithm was superior, and more likely to choose to use an algorithm to make subsequent forecasts (Study 3). This research suggests that one can reduce algorithm aversion by giving people some control - even a slight amount - over an imperfect algorithm’s forecast.","PeriodicalId":153695,"journal":{"name":"Cognition in Mathematics","volume":"114 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition in Mathematics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2616787","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Although evidence-based algorithms consistently outperform human forecasters, people often fail to use them after learning that they are imperfect, a phenomenon known as algorithm aversion. In this paper, we present three studies investigating how to reduce algorithm aversion. In incentivized forecasting tasks, participants chose between using their own forecasts or those of an algorithm that was built by experts. Participants were considerably more likely to choose to use an imperfect algorithm when they could modify its forecasts, and they performed better as a result. Notably, the preference for modifiable algorithms held even when participants were severely restricted in the modifications they could make (Studies 1-3). In fact, our results suggest that participants’ preference for modifiable algorithms was indicative of a desire for some control over the forecasting outcome, and not for a desire for greater control over the forecasting outcome, as participants’ preference for modifiable algorithms was relatively insensitive to the magnitude of the modifications they were able to make (Study 2). Additionally, we found that giving participants the freedom to modify an imperfect algorithm made them feel more satisfied with the forecasting process, more likely to believe that the algorithm was superior, and more likely to choose to use an algorithm to make subsequent forecasts (Study 3). This research suggests that one can reduce algorithm aversion by giving people some control - even a slight amount - over an imperfect algorithm’s forecast.
克服算法厌恶:人们会使用不完美的算法,如果他们可以(即使是轻微)修改它们
尽管基于证据的算法一直比人类预测者表现更好,但人们在了解到它们并不完美后,往往会放弃使用它们,这种现象被称为算法厌恶(algorithm aversion)。在本文中,我们提出了三个研究如何减少算法厌恶的研究。在激励性预测任务中,参与者在使用自己的预测或使用专家构建的算法之间做出选择。当参与者可以修改其预测时,他们更有可能选择使用不完美的算法,结果他们表现得更好。值得注意的是,即使参与者的修改受到严格限制,他们对可修改算法的偏好仍然存在(研究1-3)。事实上,我们的结果表明,参与者对可修改算法的偏好表明了对预测结果的某种控制的愿望,而不是对预测结果的更大控制的愿望,因为参与者对可修改算法的偏好对他们能够做出的修改的幅度相对不敏感(研究2)。此外,我们发现,让参与者自由修改不完美的算法会让他们对预测过程更满意,更有可能相信该算法更好,更有可能选择使用该算法进行后续预测(研究3)。这项研究表明,人们可以通过给予人们对不完美算法预测的一些控制——即使是一点点控制——来减少对算法的厌恶。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信