The paper “Capable but Amoral? Comparing AI and Human Expert Collaboration in Ethical Decision Making” by Suzanne Tolmeijer, Markus Christen, Serhiy Kandul, Markus Kneer, and Abraham Bernstein wins an honorable mention at CHI 2022, which takes place this week.

The paper, which looks into how the kind of expert giving the advice — i.e., a human or an AI advisor — influences trust, perceived responsibility, and reliance.

For more information about the paper, please check it out in our on-line library, over at the ACM Digital Library, and the video presentation prepared by Suzanne.

For your convenience you can also find the abstract right here:

While artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly applied for decision-making processes, ethical decisions pose challenges for AI applications. Given that humans cannot always agree on the right thing to do, how would ethical decision-making by AI systems be perceived and how would responsibility be ascribed in human-AI collaboration? In this study, we investigate how the expert type (human vs. AI) and level of expert autonomy (adviser vs. decider) influence trust, perceived responsibility, and reliance. We find that participants consider humans to be more morally trustworthy but less capable than their AI equivalent. This shows in participants’ reliance on AI: AI recommendations and decisions are accepted more often than the human expert’s. However, AI team experts are perceived to be less responsible than humans, while programmers and sellers of AI systems are deemed partially responsible instead.