The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Thumbs Up or Down: Consumer Reactions to Decisions by Algorithms Versus Humans
Open accessAbstract
Although companies increasingly are adopting algorithms for consumer-facing tasks (e.g., application evaluations), little research has compared consumers’ reactions to favorable decisions (e.g., acceptances) versus unfavorable decisions (e.g., rejections) about themselves that are made by an algorithm versus a human. Ten studies reveal that, in contrast to managers’ predictions, consumers react less positively when a favorable decision is made by an algorithmic (vs. a human) decision maker, whereas this difference is mitigated for an unfavorable decision. The effect is driven by distinct attribution processes: it is easier for consumers to internalize a favorable decision outcome that is rendered by a human than by an algorithm, but it is easy to externalize an unfavorable decision outcome regardless of the decision maker type. The authors conclude by advising managers on how to limit the likelihood of less positive reactions toward algorithmic (vs. human) acceptances.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
null (2016) · Philosophy Study · doi:10.17265/2159-5313/2016.09.003 · Cited by 28,317
Illusion and well‐being: A social psychological perspective on mental health
Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.193 · Cited by 7,814 · cited 1×
“In such a context, one ’ s reaction to the decision outcome often involves self-serving interpretations and motivated reasoning (Taylor and Brown 1988), a topic that has not been examined in prior research on algorithmic decisions.”
ResultThe Social Self: On Being the Same and Different at the Same Time
Brewer, M. B. (1991) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167291175001 · Cited by 5,107
The processes of causal attribution.
Kelley, H. H. (1973) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/h0034225 · Cited by 4,025 · cited 2×
“Causal reasoning — reasoning about what or who is responsible for a given outcome — is a key factor in attitude formation and change (e.g., Forsyth 1980; Kelley 1973) and the marketing literature contains many demonstrations that attributions are an important determinant of attitudes toward…”
BackgroundFrom acts to dispositions the attribution process in person perception
Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60107-0 · Cited by 3,424
Algorithm aversion: People erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err.
Dietvorst, B. J., Simmons, J. P., & Massey, C. (2015) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000033 · Cited by 3,232
How artificial intelligence will change the future of marketing
Davenport, T., Guha, A., Grewal, D., & Bressgott, T. (2020) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-019-00696-0 · Cited by 2,875
Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment
Logg, J. M., Minson, J. A., & Moore, D. A. (2019) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.12.005 · Cited by 2,061
Resistance to Medical Artificial Intelligence
Longoni, C., Bonezzi, A., & Morewedge, C. K. (2019) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1093/jcr/ucz013 · Cited by 2,015
Williams, K. D. (2007) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085641 · Cited by 1,828
Cited by
Co-creating art with generative artificial intelligence: Implications for artworks and artists
Messer, U. (2024) · Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100056 · Cited by 122
Is artificial intelligence more persuasive than humans? A meta-analysis
Huang, G., & Wang, S. (2023) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1093/joc/jqad024 · Cited by 95
How Artificial Intelligence Constrains the Human Experience
Valenzuela, A., Puntoni, S., Hoffman, D., Castelo, N., De Freitas, J., Dietvorst, B., Hildebrand, C., Huh, Y. E., Meyer, R., Sweeney, M. E., et al. (2024) · Journal of the Association for Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/730709 · Cited by 81
Self-citationService recovery by AI or human agents: Do failure and strategy context matter?
Fürst, A., Trißler, L., Friedrich, R., & Wirtz, J. (2025) · Journal of Service Management · doi:10.1108/josm-04-2024-0190 · Cited by 42
Fan, Y., & Liu, X. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1009173 · Cited by 40
Metadata
- Authors
- Yalcin, G., Lim, S., Puntoni, S., & van Osselaer, S. M. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2022-03-10
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 696-717
- ISSN
- 0022-2437 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7193
- OpenAlex
- W3177900756
- Cited by
- 175
- References
- 24
- FWCI
- 6.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Thumbs Up or Down: Consumer Reactions to Decisions by Algorithms Versus Humans. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/00222437211070016
- The paper
- Yalcin, G., Lim, S., Puntoni, S., & van Osselaer, S. M. J. (2022). Thumbs Up or Down: Consumer Reactions to Decisions by Algorithms Versus Humans. Journal of Marketing Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437211070016
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
