Cited by 1,230Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsForecasting Techniques and ApplicationsHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

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

Open access

Dietvorst, Berkeley J., Simmons, Joseph P., Massey, Cade·2018·Management Science

DOI 10.1287/mnsc.2016.2643

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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 contr…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/mnsc.2016.2643

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/brm.40.3.879 · Cited by 34,117 · cited 1×
“We then used Preacher and Hayes’s (2008) bootstrapping procedure”
Method
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 · cited 6×
“Dietvorst, Simmons, and Massey (2015) gave participants the choice of either exclusively using an algorithm’s forecasts or exclusively using their own forecasts during an incentivized forecasting task, and manipulated whether participants had experience with the algorithm prior to making this…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialSelf-citation
“Clinical versus Actuarial Judgment.”
Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1989) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.2648573 · Cited by 2,298
Clinical versus statistical prediction: A theoretical analysis and a review of the evidence.
Meehl, P. E. (1954) · University of Minnesota Press eBooks · doi:10.1037/11281-000 · Cited by 2,227
The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making.
Dawes, R. M. (1979) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.34.7.571 · Cited by 2,046
Clinical versus mechanical prediction: a meta-analysis
Grove, W. M., Zald, D. H., Lebow, B. S., Snitz, B. E., & Nelson, C. (2000) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.12.1.19 · Cited by 1,640 · cited 2×
“…of recidivism (Thompson, 1952; Wormith & Goldstone, 1984), medical diagnoses (Adams et al., 1986; Beck et al., 2011; Dawes, Faust, & Meehl, 1989; Grove et al., 2000), demand for products (Schweitzer & Cachon, 2000), and so on (for reviews see Dawes et al., 1989; Grove et al., 2000; Meehl, 1954).”
Background
Decision Bias in the Newsvendor Problem with a Known Demand Distribution: Experimental Evidence
Schweitzer, M. E., & Cachon, G. P. (2000) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.3.404.12070 · Cited by 1,077 · cited 2×
“…of recidivism (Thompson, 1952; Wormith & Goldstone, 1984), medical diagnoses (Adams et al., 1986; Beck et al., 2011; Dawes, Faust, & Meehl, 1989; Grove et al., 2000), demand for products (Schweitzer & Cachon, 2000), and so on (for reviews see Dawes et al., 1989; Grove et al., 2000; Meehl, 1954).”
Background
Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences
Bonaccio, S., & Dalal, R. S. (2006) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.07.001 · Cited by 1,011 · cited 1×
“For example, people often give less weight to other people’s advice than they should when left to their own devices (see Bonaccio & Dalal, 2006); however, it is possible that people will commit to using another person’s advice in a constrained manner.”
Background
Systematic Analysis of Breast Cancer Morphology Uncovers Stromal Features Associated with Survival
Beck, A. H., Sangoi, A. R., Leung, S. C. Y., Marinelli, R. J., Nielsen, T. O., van de Vijver, M. J., West, R. B., van de Rijn, M., & Koller, D. (2011) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3002564 · Cited by 780 · cited 1×
“…(Dawes, 1971; Dawes, 1979), prisoners’ likelihood of recidivism (Thompson, 1952; Wormith & Goldstone, 1984), medical diagnoses (Adams et al., 1986; Beck et al., 2011; Dawes, Faust, & Meehl, 1989; Grove et al., 2000), demand for products (Schweitzer & Cachon, 2000), and so on (for reviews see…”
Forecasting and Planning: An Evaluation
Hogarth, R. M., & Makridakis, S. (1981) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.27.2.115 · Cited by 614 · cited 2×
“…people’s attempts to adjust algorithmic forecasts often make them worse (e.g. Carbone, Andersen, Corriveau, & Corson, 1983; Goodwin & Fildes, 1999; Hogarth & Makridakis, 1981; Lim & O'Connor, 1995; Willemain, 1991), the benefits associated with getting people to use the algorithm may outweigh the…”
Background

Show all 27 references

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 1,002

Human-AI Interaction in Human Resource Management: Understanding Why Employees Resist Algorithmic Evaluation at Workplaces and How to Mitigate Burdens
Park, H., Ahn, D., Hosanagar, K., & Lee, J. (2021) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445304 · Cited by 152
“Even if people could make the same mistake as algorithms, people tend to trust algorithms less than humans, which Dietvorst et al. [18] called “algorithm aversion.”
Background
Bridging the chasm between AI and clinical implementation
Aristidou, A., Jena, R., & Topol, E. J. (2022) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00235-5 · Cited by 115
Who is the fairest of them all? Public attitudes and expectations regarding automated decision-making
Helberger, N., Araujo, T., & de Vreese, C. H. (2020) · Computer law & security review · doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2020.105456 · Cited by 142
Consumer reactions to AI design: Exploring consumer willingness to pay for AI‐designed products
Zhang, H., Bai, X., & Ma, Z. (2022) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21721 · Cited by 140
We and it: an interdisciplinary review of the experimental evidence on how humans interact with machines
Chugunova, M., & Sele, D. (2022) · Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics · doi:10.1016/j.socec.2022.101897 · Cited by 118
Algorithms and Decision-Making in the Public Sector
Levy, K. E. C., Chasalow, K. E., & Riley, S. (2021) · Annual Review of Law and Social Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-041221-023808 · Cited by 165
The searching artificial intelligence: Consumers show less aversion to algorithm‐recommended search product
Xie, Z., Yu, Y., Zhang, J., & Chen, M. (2022) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21706 · Cited by 125
The positive effect of artificial intelligence technology transparency on digital endorsers: Based on the theory of mind perception
Wang, X., & Qiu, X. (2024) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103777 · Cited by 118
Human–Robot Interaction: When Investors Adjust the Usage of Robo-Advisors in Peer-to-Peer Lending
Ge, R., Zheng, Z., Tian, X., & Liao, L. (2021) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2021.1009 · Cited by 112
What do we know about algorithmic literacy? The status quo and a research agenda for a growing field
Oeldorf-Hirsch, A., & Neubaum, G. (2023) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614448231182662 · Cited by 171
Explainable AI improves task performance in human–AI collaboration
Senoner, J., Schallmoser, S., Kratzwald, B., Feuerriegel, S., & Netland, T. H. (2024) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-82501-9 · Cited by 157
Artificial intelligence for political decision-making in the European Union: Effects on citizens’ perceptions of input, throughput, and output legitimacy
Starke, C., & Lünich, M. (2020) · Data & Policy · doi:10.1017/dap.2020.19 · Cited by 107
“…et al., 2018; AlgorithmWatch, 2019), this finding has important implications for data-driven policy-making, as it shows that citizens view HITL, HOTL, or HIC decision-making as legitimate arguably because politicians can modify or overrule decisions made by ADM systems (Dietvorst et al., 2018).”
Background
Integrating human judgement into quantitative forecasting methods: A review
Arvan, M., Fahimnia, B., Reisi, M., et al. (2018) · Omega · doi:10.1016/j.omega.2018.07.012 · Cited by 107
Who is the Expert? Reconciling Algorithm Aversion and Algorithm Appreciation in AI-Supported Decision Making
Hou, Y. T.-Y., & Jung, M. F. (2021) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3479864 · Cited by 135
Behavioral and neural evidence on consumer responses to human doctors and medical artificial intelligence
Yun, J. H., Lee, E., & Kim, D. H. (2021) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21445 · Cited by 112
Applicants’ Fairness Perceptions of Algorithm-Driven Hiring Procedures
Lavanchy, M., Reichert, P., Narayanan, J., & Savani, K. (2023) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-022-05320-w · Cited by 145
The Promises and Pitfalls of Robo-AdvisingPreprint
D’Acunto, F., Prabhala, N. R., & Rossi, A. G. P. (2018) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3122577 · Cited by 103
Field Experiment on the Profit Implications of Merchants’ Discretionary Power to Override Data- Driven Decision-Making Tools
Kesavan, S., & Kushwaha, T. (2020) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2020.3743 · Cited by 104
Integrating intuition and artificial intelligence in organizational decision-making
Vincent, V. U. (2021) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2021.02.008 · Cited by 137
A Conceptual Model of Trust, Perceived Risk, and Reliance on AI Decision Aids
Solberg, E., Kaarstad, M., Eitrheim, M. H. R., Bisio, R., Reegård, K., & Bloch, M. (2022) · Group & Organization Management · doi:10.1177/10596011221081238 · Cited by 102
Digital transformation in operations management: Fundamental change through agency reversal
Angelopoulos, S. P., Bendoly, E., Fransoo, J. C., Hoberg, K., Ou, C. X., & Tenhiälä, A. (2023) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1002/joom.1271 · Cited by 105
Knowing About Knowing: An Illusion of Human Competence Can Hinder Appropriate Reliance on AI Systems
He, G., Kuiper, L., & Gadiraju, U. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581025 · Cited by 107
“[13] on trust in two-stage decision making.”
Background
Empathic voice assistants: Enhancing consumer responses in voice commerce
Mari, A., Mandelli, A., & Algesheimer, R. (2024) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114566 · Cited by 124
The State‐of‐the‐Art in Predictive Visual Analytics
Lu, Y., Garcia, R., Hansen, B., et al. (2017) · Computer Graphics Forum · doi:10.1111/cgf.13210 · Cited by 98
Slow response times undermine trust in algorithmic (but not human) predictions
Efendić, E., de Calseyde, P. P. F. M. V., & Evans, A. M. (2020) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.01.008 · Cited by 103
The Impacts of Algorithmic Work Assignment on Fairness Perceptions and Productivity: Evidence from Field Experiments
Bai, B., Dai, H., Zhang, D., Zhang, F., & Hu, H. (2020) · Manufacturing & Service Operations Management · doi:10.1287/msom.2022.1120 · Cited by 103
Beyond the code: The impact of AI algorithm transparency signaling on user trust and relational satisfaction
Park, K., & Yoon, H. Y. (2024) · Public Relations Review · doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2024.102507 · Cited by 137
The critical role of trust in adopting AI-powered educational technology for learning: An instrument for measuring student perceptions
Nazaretsky, T., Mejia‐Domenzain, P., Swamy, V., Frej, J., & Käser, T. (2025) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100368 · Cited by 164
When Confidence Meets Accuracy: Exploring the Effects of Multiple Performance Indicators on Trust in Machine Learning Models
Rechkemmer, A., & Yin, M. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3501967 · Cited by 97
Consumers Object to Algorithms Making Morally Relevant Tradeoffs Because of Algorithms’ Consequentialist Decision Strategies
Dietvorst, B. J., & Bartels, D. M. (2021) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1002/jcpy.1266 · Cited by 103
Self-citation
Predictive maintenance for industry 5.0: behavioural inquiries from a work system perspective
van Oudenhoven, B., de Calseyde, P. P. F. M. V., Basten, R., & Demerouti, E. (2022) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2022.2154403 · Cited by 107
Practical insights for sales force digitalization success
Zoltners, A. A., Sinha, P., Sahay, D., Shastri, A., & Lorimer, S. E. (2021) · Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management · doi:10.1080/08853134.2021.1908144 · Cited by 111
AI Automation and Retailer Regret in Supply Chains
Li, M., & Li, T. (2020) · Production and Operations Management · doi:10.1111/poms.13498 · Cited by 92
Preference for human, not algorithm aversion
Morewedge, C. K. (2022) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2022.07.007 · Cited by 94
Algorithmic fairness in business analytics: Directions for research and practice
De‐Arteaga, M., Feuerriegel, S., & Saar‐Tsechansky, M. (2022) · Production and Operations Management · doi:10.1111/poms.13839 · Cited by 98
Artificial intelligence or human: when and why consumers prefer AI recommendations
Jin, F., & Zhang, X. (2023) · Information Technology and People · doi:10.1108/itp-01-2023-0022 · Cited by 109
What drives managers towards algorithm aversion and how to overcome it? Mitigating the impact of innovation resistance through technology readiness
Mahmud, H., Islam, A. K. M. N., & Mitra, R. K. (2023) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122641 · Cited by 109
Home-Tutoring Services Assisted with Technology: Investigating the Role of Artificial Intelligence Using a Randomized Field Experiment
Kim, J. H., Kim, M., Kwak, D., & Lee, S. (2021) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/00222437211050351 · Cited by 74
The rise of chatbots: The effect of using chatbot agents on consumers' responses to request rejection
Yu, S., Xiong, J., & Shen, H. (2022) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1002/jcpy.1330 · Cited by 99
Artificial intelligence and machine learning in purchasing and supply management: A mixed-methods review of the state-of-the-art in literature and practice
Spreitzenbarth, J. M., Bode, C., & Stuckenschmidt, H. (2024) · Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management · doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2024.100896 · Cited by 106
Perceived Fairness of Human Managers Compared with Artificial Intelligence in Employee Performance Evaluation
Qin, S. (., Jia, N., Luo, X., Liao, C., & Huang, Z. (2023) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2023.2267316 · Cited by 92
Effective human–AI work design for collaborative decision-making
Jain, R., Garg, N., & Khera, S. N. (2023) · Kybernetes · doi:10.1108/k-04-2022-0548 · Cited by 85
Voice-Based AI in Call Center Customer Service: Evidence from a Field Experiment
Wang, L., Huang, N., Hong, Y., Liu, L., Guo, X., & Chen, G. (2020) · Production and Operations Management · doi:10.1111/poms.13953 · Cited by 112
Fairness Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence: A Review and Path Forward
Narayanan, D., Nagpal, M., McGuire, J., Schweitzer, S., & Cremer, D. D. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2210890 · Cited by 99
The Persuasive Power of Algorithmic and Crowdsourced Advice
Gunaratne, J., Zalmanson, L., & Nov, O. (2018) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2018.1523534 · Cited by 85
When Algorithmic Predictions Use Human-Generated Data: A Bias-Aware Classification Algorithm for Breast Cancer Diagnosis
Ahsen, M. E., Ayvaci, M., & Raghunathan, S. (2017) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2018.0789 · Cited by 81
A survey of human judgement and quantitative forecasting methods
Zellner, M., Abbas, A. E., Budescu, D. V., & Galstyan, A. (2021) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.201187 · Cited by 100
Design principles for artificial intelligence-augmented decision making: An action design research study
Herath, S., Shrestha, Y. R., & von Krogh, G. (2024) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1080/0960085x.2024.2330402 · Cited by 118
The Effects of Explanations in Automated Essay Scoring Systems on Student Trust and Motivation
Conijn, R., Kahr, P. K., & Snijders, C. C. P. (2023) · Journal of Learning Analytics · doi:10.18608/jla.2023.7801 · Cited by 114
Reducing algorithm aversion through experience
Filiz, I., Judek, J. R., Lorenz, M., & Spiwoks, M. (2021) · Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance · doi:10.1016/j.jbef.2021.100524 · Cited by 88
Crowdsourcing Perceptions of Fair Predictors for Machine Learning
van Berkel, N., Gonçalves, J., Hettiachchi, D., Wijenayake, S., Kelly, R., & Kostakos, V. (2019) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3359130 · Cited by 74
Human vs. Automated Sales Agents: How and Why Customer Responses Shift Across Sales Stages
Adam, M., Roethke, K., & Benlian, A. (2022) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2022.1171 · Cited by 88
Building machines that learn and think with people
Collins, K. M., Sucholutsky, I., Bhatt, U., Chandra, K., Wong, L., Lee, M., Zhang, C. E., Zhi‐Xuan, T., Ho, M. K., Mansinghka, V. K., et al. (2024) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-024-01991-9 · Cited by 125
An Eye for Artificial Intelligence: Insights Into the Governance of Artificial Intelligence and Vision for Future Research
Chhillar, D., & Aguilera, R. V. (2022) · Business & Society · doi:10.1177/00076503221080959 · Cited by 96
Robo-advisors and investment intention: A perspective of value-based adoption
Hong, X., Pan, L., Gong, Y. Y., & Chen, Q. (2023) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2023.103832 · Cited by 90
The Effects of Generative AI on High Skilled Work: Evidence from Three Field Experiments with Software Developers
Cui, Z., Demirer, M., Jaffe, S., Musolff, L., Peng, S., & Salz, T. (2024) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4945566 · Cited by 73
Artificial intelligence in talent acquisition: exploring organisational and operational dimensions
Paramita, D., Okwir, S., & Nuur, C. (2024) · International journal of organizational analysis · doi:10.1108/ijoa-09-2023-3992 · Cited by 121
Soliciting Human-in-the-Loop User Feedback for Interactive Machine Learning Reduces User Trust and Impressions of Model Accuracy
Honeycutt, D. R., Nourani, M., & Ragan, E. D. (2020) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Human Computation and Crowdsourcing · doi:10.1609/hcomp.v8i1.7464 · Cited by 86
Speaking vs. listening? Balance conversation attributes of voice assistants for better voice marketing
Hu, P., Gong, Y. Y., Lu, Y., & Ding, A. W. (2022) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2022.04.006 · Cited by 85
Do Robo-Advisors Make Us Better Investors?
Back, C., Morana, S., & Spann, M. (2021) · Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics · doi:10.1016/j.socec.2023.101984 · Cited by 101
AI credibility and consumer-AI experiences: a conceptual framework
Khan, A. W., & Mishra, A. (2023) · Journal of Service Theory and Practice · doi:10.1108/jstp-03-2023-0108 · Cited by 75
Robo-investment aversion
Niszczota, P., & Kaszás, D. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0239277 · Cited by 82
Twenty-four years of empirical research on trust in AI: a bibliometric review of trends, overlooked issues, and future directions
Benk, M., Kerstan, S., von Wangenheim, F., & Ferrario, A. (2024) · AI & Society · doi:10.1007/s00146-024-02059-y · Cited by 101
Human-in-the-loop machine learning: Reconceptualizing the role of the user in interactive approaches
Gómez–Carmona, O., Casado–Mansilla, D., López–de–Ipiña, D., & García-Zubía, J. (2024) · Internet of Things · doi:10.1016/j.iot.2023.101048 · Cited by 84
Theorising Algorithmic Justice
Marjanovic, O., Ćećez-Kecmanović, D., & Vidgen, R. T. (2021) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1080/0960085x.2021.1934130 · Cited by 82
Der Glaube an Big Data
Lünich, M. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-36368-0 · Cited by 68
Unveiling the Mind of the Machine
Clegg, M., Hofstetter, R., de Bellis, E., & Schmitt, B. H. (2023) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1093/jcr/ucad075 · Cited by 75
Delegation of purchasing tasks to AI: The role of perceived choice and decision autonomy
Husairi, M. A., & Rossi, P. (2023) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2023.114166 · Cited by 78
Exploring STEAM teachers’ trust in AI-based educational technologies: a structural equation modelling approach
Ayanwale, M. A., Adelana, O. P., & Odufuwa, T. T. (2024) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-024-00092-z · Cited by 90
“There Is Not Enough Information”: On the Effects of Explanations on Perceptions of Informational Fairness and Trustworthiness in Automated Decision-Making
Schoeffer, J., Kuehl, N., & Machowski, Y. (2022) · 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3531146.3533218 · Cited by 67
Why do Family Members Reject AI in Health Care? Competing Effects of Emotions
Park, E. H., Werder, K., Cao, L., & Ramesh, B. (2022) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2022.2096550 · Cited by 75
Overconfidence and the adoption of robo-advice: why overconfident investors drive the expansion of automated financial advice
Piehlmaier, D. (2022) · Financial Innovation · doi:10.1186/s40854-021-00324-3 · Cited by 85
Can Personalized Recommendations in Charity Advertising Boost Donation? The Role of Perceived Autonomy
Lv, L., & Huang, M. (2022) · Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/00913367.2022.2109082 · Cited by 77
Believing in Analytics: Managers’ Adherence to Price Recommendations from a DSS
Caro, F., & Cuenca, A. S. D. T. (2023) · Manufacturing & Service Operations Management · doi:10.1287/msom.2022.1166 · Cited by 66
Overcoming Consumer Resistance to AI in General Health Care
Gaczek, P., Pozharliev, R., Leszczyński, G., & Zieliński, M. (2023) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1177/10949968221151061 · Cited by 72
Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: Algorithmic Assessments, Transparency, and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies
Bauer, K., & Gill, A. (2023) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2023.1217 · Cited by 79
How to survive in the age of artificial intelligence? Exploring the intelligent transformations of SMEs in central China
Wang, J., Lu, Y., Fan, S., Hu, P., & Wang, B. (2021) · International Journal of Emerging Markets · doi:10.1108/ijoem-06-2021-0985 · Cited by 73
Algorithm Aversion: Evidence from Ridesharing Drivers
Liu, M., Tang, X., Xia, S., Zhang, S., Zhu, Y., & Meng, Q. (2023) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2022.02475 · Cited by 64
1 + 1 > 2? Information, Humans, and Machines
Lu, T., & Zhang, Y. (2024) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2023.0305 · Cited by 70
Social trust and algorithmic equity: The societal perspectives of users’ intention to interact with algorithm recommendation systems
Wu, W., Huang, Y., & Qian, L. (2024) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2023.114115 · Cited by 73
How safe is safe enough? Psychological mechanisms underlying extreme safety demands for self-driving cars
Shariff, A., Bonnefon, J., & Rahwan, I. (2021) · Transportation Research Part C Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1016/j.trc.2021.103069 · Cited by 63
To err is human, not algorithmic – Robust reactions to erring algorithms
Renier, L. A., Mast, M. S., & Bekbergenova, A. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2021.106879 · Cited by 74
Being seen… by human or machine? Acknowledgment effects on customer responses differ between human and robotic service workers
Frank, D., & Otterbring, T. (2023) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122345 · Cited by 69
Perceptions of Justice By Algorithms
Williams, G. Y., Themeli, E., Stamhuis, E. F., Philipsen, S., & Puntoni, S. (2022) · Artificial Intelligence and Law · doi:10.1007/s10506-022-09312-z · Cited by 70
Designing explainable AI to improve human-AI team performance: A medical stakeholder-driven scoping review
Subramanian, H. V., Canfield, C., & Shank, D. B. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence in Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.artmed.2024.102780 · Cited by 73
Consumer responses to human-AI collaboration at organizational frontlines: strategies to escape algorithm aversion in content creation
Haupt, M., Freidank, J., & Haas, A. (2024) · Review of Managerial Science · doi:10.1007/s11846-024-00748-y · Cited by 86
A pathologist–AI collaboration framework for enhancing diagnostic accuracies and efficiencies
Huang, Z., Yang, E., Shen, J., Gratzinger, D. A., Eyerer, F., Liang, B., Nirschl, J., Bingham, D. B., Dussaq, A., Kunder, C. A., et al. (2024) · Nature Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1038/s41551-024-01223-5 · Cited by 65
Harnessing the Potential of Artificial Intelligence: Affordances, Constraints, and Strategic Implications for Professional Services
Yang, J., Amrollahi, A., & Marrone, M. (2024) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2024.101864 · Cited by 59
Effective Implementation of Predictive Sales Analytics
Habel, J., Alavi, S. H., & Heinitz, N. (2022) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/00222437221151039 · Cited by 62
No Thanks, Dear AI! Understanding the Effects of Disclosure and Deployment of Artificial Intelligence in Public Sector Recruitment
Keppeler, F. (2022) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/muad009 · Cited by 71
Navigating autonomy and control in human-AI delegation: User responses to technology- versus user-invoked task allocation
Adam, M., Diebel, C., Goutier, M., & Benlian, A. (2024) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2024.114193 · Cited by 62
The Role of Human Managers within Algorithmic Performance Management Systems: A Process Model of Employee Trust in Managers through Reflexivity
Leavitt, K., Barnes, C. M., & Shapiro, D. L. (2024) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2022.0058 · Cited by 70
The Role of Consumer Autonomy in Developing Sustainable AI: A Conceptual Framework
Bjørlo, L. V., Moen, Ø., & Pasquine, M. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su13042332 · Cited by 70
Organizational frontlines in the digital age: The Consumer–Autonomous Technology–Worker (CAW) framework
van Doorn, J., Smailhodžić, E., Puntoni, S., Li, J., Schumann, J. H., & Holthöwer, J. (2023) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114000 · Cited by 61
Designing Collaborative Intelligence Systems for Employee-AI Service Co-Production
Blaurock, M., Büttgen, M., & Schepers, J. (2024) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/10946705241238751 · Cited by 65
Zombies in the Loop? Humans Trust Untrustworthy AI-Advisors for Ethical Decisions
Krügel, S., Ostermaier, A., & Uhl, M. (2022) · Philosophy & Technology · doi:10.1007/s13347-022-00511-9 · Cited by 76
Cobotic service teams and power dynamics: Understanding and mitigating unintended consequences of human-robot collaboration in healthcare services
Shanks, I., Scott, M. L., Mende, M., van Doorn, J., & Grewal, D. (2024) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-024-01004-1 · Cited by 58
Using judgment to select and adjust forecasts from statistical models
De Baets, S., & Harvey, N. (2020) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2020.01.028 · Cited by 44
D-BIAS: A Causality-Based Human-in-the-Loop System for Tackling Algorithmic Bias
Ghai, B., & Mueller, K. D. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2022.3209484 · Cited by 77
Collaboration with machines in B2B marketing: Overcoming managers' aversion to AI-CRM with explainability
Gaczek, P., Leszczyński, G., & Mouakher, A. (2023) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.09.007 · Cited by 68

Authors: Dietvorst, B. J., Simmons, J. P., & Massey, C.
Affiliations: University of Chicago (US)
University of Pennsylvania (US)
ORCID: Dietvorst, Berkeley J.
Simmons, Joseph P.
Venue: Management Science
Publisher: Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
Published: 2018-03
Volume: 64
Issue: 3
Pages: 1155-1170
ISSN: 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
1526-5501
DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2016.2643
OpenAlex: W3121705224
Semantic Scholar: e1706933e9e1d15515c3a444454c15890e6d134f
Cited by: 1,230
References: 27
Citations by year: 2026: 260 · 2025: 218 · 2024: 203 · 2023: 179 · 2022: 138 · 2021: 104 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 16
FWCI: 20.17
Type: journal article
Language: en
Open access: green
doi.org
Locations: Management Science (publishedVersion)
SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
ScholarlyCommons (University of Pennsylvania) (submittedVersion)
Topics: Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Forecasting Techniques and Applications
Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Keywords: algorithm aversion, forecasting, trust in algorithms

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

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

Abstract

Overview

Integrity signals

Verification

Claims the paper makes

Claims other papers make about this one

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Related

Metadata

Record

About these checks