English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Paper

We and It: An Interdisciplinary Review of the Experimental Evidence on Human-Machine Interaction

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons226995

Chugunova,  Marina
MPI for Innovation and Competition, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Chugunova, M., & Sele, D. (2020). We and It: An Interdisciplinary Review of the Experimental Evidence on Human-Machine Interaction. Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 20-15.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0007-121E-4
Abstract
Today, humans interact with technology frequently and in a variety of settings. Their behavior in these interactions has attracted considerable research interest across several fields, with sometimes little exchange among them and seemingly inconsistent findings. Here, we review over 110 experimental studies on human-machine interaction. We synthesize the evidence from different disciplines, suggest ways to reconcile inconsistencies, and elaborate on political and societal implications. The reviewed studies show that people react to automated agents differently than to humans: They behave more rationally, and are less prone to emotional and social responses. We show that there are several factors which systematically impact the willingness to accept automated decisions: task context, performance expectations and the distribution of decision authority. That is, humans seem willing to (over-)rely on algorithmic support, yet averse to fully ceding their decision authority. These behavioral regularities need to be considered when deliberating the benefits and risks of automation.