6 results
Now showing1 - 6 of 6
- Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Access status: with files , A taxonomy of AI experimentsWe introduce a taxonomy of artificial intelligence (AI) experiments. Our taxonomy produces four types of AI experiments: conceptual AI experiments, stylized AI experiments, quasi-natural AI experiments, and natural AI experiments. At the core of our taxonomy is the sophistication of AI used, which we evaluate using a simple and robust proxy test of whether AI is developed exclusively for a research study. We discuss the advantages, disadvantages, and best use cases for each type and illustrate the use of each type in various examples. We provide a guide on how to choose the type of AI experiment that best fits a given research question.Publicationtype: Journal Article32 12 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Access status: with files , The impact of process automation on performance(2025-05-19)This paper explores how process automation affects performance, particularly in bonus-related evaluations. Using a principal–agent framework, we study the impact of predefined criteria set during system design. Specifically, we examine two scenarios in which the performance threshold for bonus payments is set either ex-ante (before performance is known) or ex-post (after performance is known). Worker performance is measured using the chosen-effort method. Our design emphasizes the role of the decision-maker in the automation process, while also considering the influence of process fairness, trust in the process, and expectations. We find that performance is significantly lower when an automated process is used, but there is no difference in performance based on who makes the decision to automate. Furthermore, we observe no variation in perceived fairness or trust between the two processes, although expectations differ. Our results suggest that while automation impacts performance, the decision-maker’s role and perceptions of fairness and trust do not significantly affect the performance, but expectations do.Publicationtype: Journal Article53 24 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Access status: with files , The courtesy game(2025-03-21); ; Abstract In this paper, we study the role of courtesy in the solution of asymmetric social dilemmas. To this end, we introduce a novel game, the Courtesy Game, and show with the help of a laboratory experiment that an efficient equilibrium in the form of turn-taking, i.e., alternate play of the weakly dominant and weakly dominated strategies of the stage game, only emerges in a partner matching and in a few groups in which certain players take the lead. One conclusion from this result is that a ‘courtesy equilibrium’ does not arise spontaneously but requires explicit rules of conduct.Publicationtype: Working Paper4 23 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Access status: with files , Six human-centered artificial intelligence grand challenges(Taylor & Francis, 2023-01-02); ; ; ; Widespread adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies is substantially affecting the human condition in ways that are not yet well understood. Negative unintended consequences abound including the perpetuation and exacerbation of societal inequalities and divisions via algorithmic decision making. We present six grand challenges for the scientific community to create AI technologies that are human-centered, that is, ethical, fair, and enhance the human condition. These grand challenges are the result of an international collaboration across academia, industry and government and represent the consensus views of a group of 26 experts in the field of human-centered artificial intelligence (HCAI). In essence, these challenges advocate for a human-centered approach to AI that (1) is centered in human well-being, (2) is designed responsibly, (3) respects privacy, (4) follows human-centered design principles, (5) is subject to appropriate governance and oversight, and (6) interacts with individuals while respecting human’s cognitive capacities. We hope that these challenges and their associated research directions serve as a call for action to conduct research and development in AI that serves as a force multiplier towards more fair, equitable and sustainable societies.Publicationtype: Journal ArticleScopus© Citations 91 111 644 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Access status: without files , Acceptance of Artificial Intelligence in Cars: A Survey Approach(2021-07); This exploratory descriptive survey analyzes the acceptance of different automated systems used in partly and fully autonomous cars, and whether there is a difference between the level of acceptance for someone’s own use and desire for others to use them. The survey reports answers from 199 respondents to an online questionnaire run on Amazon Mechanical Turk (Amazon MTurk). The majority of respondents express high or very high acceptance of partly automated systems; however, when it comes to full automation, the acceptance rate drops significantly. Moreover, the acceptance rate for roughly half of the systems does not differ significantly for the respondent’s own use and use by others.Publicationtype: Conference Paper86 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Access status: without files , Sharing responsibility with a machine(2019-06); Humans make decisions jointly with others. They share responsibility for the outcome with their interaction partners. Today, more and more often the partner in a decision is not another human but, instead, a machine. Here we ask whether the type of the partner, machine or human, affects our responsibility, our perception of the choice and the choice itself. As a workhorse we use a modified dictator game with two joint decision makers: either two humans or one human and one machine. We find no treatment effect on perceived responsibility or guilt. We also find only a small and insignificant effect on actual choices.Publicationtype: Journal Article45