IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v81y2025ics0160791x24003397.html

An interdisciplinary perspective on AI-supported decision making in medicine

Author

Listed:
  • Ammeling, Jonas
  • Aubreville, Marc
  • Fritz, Alexis
  • Kießig, Angelika
  • Krügel, Sebastian
  • Uhl, Matthias

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI)-supported medical diagnosis offers the potential to utilize the collaborative intelligence of context-sensitive humans and narrowly focused machines for patients’ benefit. The employment of machine-learning-based decision-support systems (MLDSS) in medicine, however, raises important multidisciplinary challenges that cannot be addressed in isolation. We discuss three disciplinary perspectives on the topic and their interplay. Ethical issues arise at the level of changing responsibility structures in healthcare. Behavioral issues relate to the actual impact that the system has on physicians. Technical issues arise with respect to the training of a machine learning (ML) model that gives accurate advice. We argue that the interaction between physicians and MLDSS including the concrete design of the interface in which this interaction occurs can only be considered at the intersection of all three disciplines.

Suggested Citation

  • Ammeling, Jonas & Aubreville, Marc & Fritz, Alexis & Kießig, Angelika & Krügel, Sebastian & Uhl, Matthias, 2025. "An interdisciplinary perspective on AI-supported decision making in medicine," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:81:y:2025:i:c:s0160791x24003397
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102791
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X24003397
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102791?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mandy Hütter & Fabian Ache, 2016. "Seeking advice: A sampling approach to advice taking," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(4), pages 401-415, July.
    2. Logg, Jennifer M. & Minson, Julia A. & Moore, Don A., 2019. "Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 90-103.
    3. Cojuharenco, Irina & Karelaia, Natalia, 2020. "When leaders ask questions: Can humility premiums buffer the effects of competence penalties?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 113-134.
    4. Soll, Jack B. & Mannes, Albert E., 2011. "Judgmental aggregation strategies depend on whether the self is involved," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 81-102, January.
    5. Berkeley J. Dietvorst & Joseph P. Simmons & Cade Massey, 2018. "Overcoming Algorithm Aversion: People Will Use Imperfect Algorithms If They Can (Even Slightly) Modify Them," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1155-1170, March.
    6. Balagopal Vissa & Aya S. Chacar, 2009. "Leveraging ties: the contingent value of entrepreneurial teams' external advice networks on Indian software venture performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(11), pages 1179-1191, November.
    7. Alexander S. Alexiev & Justin J. P. Jansen & Frans A. J. Van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2011. "Industry Differences in Strategic Decision Making of Dutch Top Management Teams," Chapters, in: Killian J. McCarthy & Maya Fiolet & Wilfred Dolfsma (ed.), The Nature of the New Firm, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Yaniv, Ilan, 2004. "Receiving other people's advice: Influence and benefit," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 1-13, January.
    9. Michael Klenk, 2022. "(Online) manipulation: sometimes hidden, always careless," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 80(1), pages 85-105, January.
    10. See, Kelly E. & Morrison, Elizabeth W. & Rothman, Naomi B. & Soll, Jack B., 2011. "The detrimental effects of power on confidence, advice taking, and accuracy," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 272-285.
    11. Soll, Jack B. & Mannes, Albert E., 2011. "Judgmental aggregation strategies depend on whether the self is involved," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 81-102.
    12. Hütter, Mandy & Ache, Fabian, 2016. "Seeking advice: A sampling approach to advice taking," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(4), pages 401-415, July.
    13. Philipp Ecken & Richard Pibernik, 2016. "Hit or Miss: What Leads Experts to Take Advice for Long-Term Judgments?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(7), pages 2002-2021, July.
    14. Davide Castelvecchi, 2016. "Can we open the black box of AI?," Nature, Nature, vol. 538(7623), pages 20-23, October.
    15. repec:plo:pone00:0180420 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Bonaccio, Silvia & Dalal, Reeshad S., 2006. "Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 127-151, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Spiegler, Simone & Hoda, Rashina & Pant, Aastha, 2026. "Images of AI: How AI practitioners view the impact of Artificial Intelligence on society, now and in the future," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    2. Yi WANG & Yiting XU & Yufei ZHONG, 2025. "Does Artificial Intelligence Invariably Enhance ESG Performance?," Journal for Economic Forecasting, Institute for Economic Forecasting, vol. 0(2), pages 24-40, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Keding, Christoph & Meissner, Philip, 2021. "Managerial overreliance on AI-augmented decision-making processes: How the use of AI-based advisory systems shapes choice behavior in R&D investment decisions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    2. Kausel, Edgar E. & Culbertson, Satoris S. & Leiva, Pedro I. & Slaughter, Jerel E. & Jackson, Alexander T., 2015. "Too arrogant for their own good? Why and when narcissists dismiss advice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 33-50.
    3. Milyavsky, Maxim & Gvili, Yaniv, 2024. "Advice taking vs. combining opinions: Framing social information as advice increases source’s perceived helping intentions, trust, and influence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    4. Philipp Ecken & Richard Pibernik, 2016. "Hit or Miss: What Leads Experts to Take Advice for Long-Term Judgments?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(7), pages 2002-2021, July.
    5. Önkal, Dilek & Sinan Gönül, M. & Goodwin, Paul & Thomson, Mary & Öz, Esra, 2017. "Evaluating expert advice in forecasting: Users’ reactions to presumed vs. experienced credibility," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 280-297.
    6. Benedikt Berger & Martin Adam & Alexander Rühr & Alexander Benlian, 2021. "Watch Me Improve—Algorithm Aversion and Demonstrating the Ability to Learn," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 63(1), pages 55-68, February.
    7. Rader, Christina A. & Soll, Jack B. & Larrick, Richard P., 2015. "Pushing away from representative advice: Advice taking, anchoring, and adjustment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 26-43.
    8. Reif, Jessica A. & Larrick, Richard P. & Soll, Jack B., 2024. "The inclusion of anchors when seeking advice: Causes and consequences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    9. Logg, Jennifer M. & Minson, Julia A. & Moore, Don A., 2019. "Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 90-103.
    10. Merle, Aurélie & St-Onge, Anik & Sénécal, Sylvain, 2022. "Does it pay to be honest? The effect of retailer-provided negative feedback on consumers’ product choice and shopping experience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 532-543.
    11. Alison Wood Brooks & Francesca Gino & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2015. "Smart People Ask for (My) Advice: Seeking Advice Boosts Perceptions of Competence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1421-1435, June.
    12. Robert M. Gillenkirch & Julia Ortner & Sebastian Robert & Louis Velthuis, 2023. "Designing incentives and performance measurement for advisors: How to make decision-makers listen to advice," Working Papers 2304, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    13. Chacon, Alvaro & Kausel, Edgar E. & Reyes, Tomas & Trautmann, Stefan, 2025. "Preventing algorithm aversion: People are willing to use algorithms with a learning label," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    14. Ekaterina Jussupow & Kai Spohrer & Armin Heinzl & Joshua Gawlitza, 2021. "Augmenting Medical Diagnosis Decisions? An Investigation into Physicians’ Decision-Making Process with Artificial Intelligence," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 713-735, September.
    15. Chen Li & Ning Liu, 2021. "What to tell? Wise communication and wise crowd," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 90(2), pages 279-299, March.
    16. Ilan Yaniv & Shoham Choshen-Hillel, 2012. "When guessing what another person would say is better than giving your own opinion: Using perspective-taking to improve advice-taking," Discussion Paper Series dp622, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    17. Jaeseob Lim & Sang-Hun Lee, 2020. "Utility and use of accuracy cues in social learning of crowd preferences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-25, October.
    18. Christiane B. Haubitz & Cedric A. Lehmann & Andreas Fügener & Ulrich W. Thonemann, 2021. "The Risk of Algorithm Transparency: How Algorithm Complexity Drives the Effects on Use of Advice," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 078, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    19. Petropoulos, Fotios & Apiletti, Daniele & Assimakopoulos, Vassilios & Babai, Mohamed Zied & Barrow, Devon K. & Ben Taieb, Souhaib & Bergmeir, Christoph & Bessa, Ricardo J. & Bijak, Jakub & Boylan, Joh, 2022. "Forecasting: theory and practice," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 705-871.
      • Fotios Petropoulos & Daniele Apiletti & Vassilios Assimakopoulos & Mohamed Zied Babai & Devon K. Barrow & Souhaib Ben Taieb & Christoph Bergmeir & Ricardo J. Bessa & Jakub Bijak & John E. Boylan & Jet, 2020. "Forecasting: theory and practice," Papers 2012.03854, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    20. Thomas Schultze & Anne-Fernandine Rakotoarisoa & Stefan Schulz-Hardt, 2015. "Effects of distance between initial estimates and advice on advice utilization," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(2), pages 144-171, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:81:y:2025:i:c:s0160791x24003397. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.