Big Data and Society 5 (1) (2018)

Abstract
Algorithms increasingly make managerial decisions that people used to make. Perceptions of algorithms, regardless of the algorithms' actual performance, can significantly influence their adoption, yet we do not fully understand how people perceive decisions made by algorithms as compared with decisions made by humans. To explore perceptions of algorithmic management, we conducted an online experiment using four managerial decisions that required either mechanical or human skills. We manipulated the decision-maker, and measured perceived fairness, trust, and emotional response. With the mechanical tasks, algorithmic and human-made decisions were perceived as equally fair and trustworthy and evoked similar emotions; however, human managers' fairness and trustworthiness were attributed to the manager's authority, whereas algorithms' fairness and trustworthiness were attributed to their perceived efficiency and objectivity. Human decisions evoked some positive emotion due to the possibility of social recognition, whereas algorithmic decisions generated a more mixed response – algorithms were seen as helpful tools but also possible tracking mechanisms. With the human tasks, algorithmic decisions were perceived as less fair and trustworthy and evoked more negative emotion than human decisions. Algorithms' perceived lack of intuition and subjective judgment capabilities contributed to the lower fairness and trustworthiness judgments. Positive emotion from human decisions was attributed to social recognition, while negative emotion from algorithmic decisions was attributed to the dehumanizing experience of being evaluated by machines. This work reveals people's lay concepts of algorithmic versus human decisions in a management context and suggests that task characteristics matter in understanding people's experiences with algorithmic technologies.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1177/2053951718756684
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,512
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Using Language.Herbert Clark - 1996 - Cambridge University Press.
Implicit Learning and Tacit Knowledge.Arthur S. Reber - 1989 - Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 118 (3):219-235.
Implicit Learning and Tacit Knowledge.Arthur S. Reber - 1989 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 118:219-35.

View all 7 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

View all 27 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Democratizing Algorithmic Fairness.Pak-Hang Wong - 2020 - Philosophy and Technology 33 (2):225-244.
Introduction: The Governance of Algorithms.Marcello D’Agostino & Massimo Durante - 2018 - Philosophy and Technology 31 (4):499-505.
Ethical Implications and Accountability of Algorithms.Kirsten Martin - 2018 - Journal of Business Ethics 160 (4):835-850.
Is Evolution Algorithmic?Marcin Miłkowski - 2009 - Minds and Machines 19 (4):465-475.
Machine Decisions and Human Consequences.Teresa Scantamburlo, Andrew Charlesworth & Nello Cristianini - 2019 - In Karen Yeung & Martin Lodge (eds.), Algorithmic Regulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-11-24

Total views
9 ( #955,169 of 2,520,893 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #270,438 of 2,520,893 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes