IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v82y2025ics0160791x25000521.html

Treating differently or equally: A study exploring attitudes towards AI moral advisors

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Yiming
  • Wang, Tianhong

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) technology has evolved from serving primarily as a decision-maker in the past to increasingly taking on the role of an advisor. However, contemporary attitudes toward AI applications in moral decision-making remain unclear. In Study 1, we explored whether there is a difference in attitudes towards human and AI moral advisors when both are defined in the context of a one-time decision-making scenario. Studies 2a and 2b, with the goal of achieving higher ecological validity, optimized decision-making methods and scenarios, respectively. We obtained consistent results, indicating that people equally trust the advice of AI moral advisors and human moral advisors. When it comes to assigning responsibility after a decision, individuals assign responsibility equally to both AI and human advisors.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Yiming & Wang, Tianhong, 2025. "Treating differently or equally: A study exploring attitudes towards AI moral advisors," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:82:y:2025:i:c:s0160791x25000521
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.102862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X25000521
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.102862?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. Wang, Shaofeng & Zhang, Hao, 2024. "Green entrepreneurship success in the age of generative artificial intelligence: The interplay of technology adoption, knowledge management, and government support," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    2. Chiara Longoni & Andrea Bonezzi & Carey K Morewedge, 2019. "Resistance to Medical Artificial Intelligence," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 46(4), pages 629-650.
    3. 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.
    4. Ivanov, Stanislav & Webster, Craig, 2024. "Automated decision-making: Hoteliers’ perceptions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    5. Andersen, Jens Peter & Degn, Lise & Fishberg, Rachel & Graversen, Ebbe K. & Horbach, Serge P.J.M. & Schmidt, Evanthia Kalpazidou & Schneider, Jesper W. & Sørensen, Mads P., 2025. "Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) in the research process – A survey of researchers’ practices and perceptions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    6. Li, Jian & Huang, Jin-Song, 2020. "Dimensions of artificial intelligence anxiety based on the integrated fear acquisition theory," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    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. Méndez-Suárez, Mariano & Ćukušić, Maja & Ninčević-Pašalić, Ivana, 2026. "AI FoMO (fear of missing out) in the workplace," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).

    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. Zhang, Lixuan & Yencha, Christopher, 2022. "Examining perceptions towards hiring algorithms," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    2. Li, Jian & Zhao, Jingdi & Huang, Jinsong, 2025. "Social avoidance needs boost AI's nonsocial attribute valuation in secret consumption," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    3. Siliang Tong & Nan Jia & Xueming Luo & Zheng Fang, 2021. "The Janus face of artificial intelligence feedback: Deployment versus disclosure effects on employee performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(9), pages 1600-1631, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Wang, Xun & Rodrigues, Vasco Sanchez & Demir, Emrah & Sarkis, Joseph, 2024. "Algorithm aversion during disruptions: The case of safety stock," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    6. Kim, Jeong Hyun & Kim, Jungkeun & Baek, Tae Hyun & Kim, Changju, 2025. "ChatGPT personalized and humorous recommendations," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    7. Chen, Yaqi & Wang, Haizhong & Rao Hill, Sally & Li, Binglian, 2024. "Consumer attitudes toward AI-generated ads: Appeal types, self-efficacy and AI’s social role," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    8. Chiara Longoni & Andrea Bonezzi & Carey K. Morewedge, 2020. "Resistance to medical artificial intelligence is an attribute in a compensatory decision process: response to Pezzo and Becksted (2020)," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 446-448, May.
    9. Chen Yang & Jing Hu, 2022. "When do consumers prefer AI-enabled customer service? The interaction effect of brand personality and service provision type on brand attitudes and purchase intentions," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 29(2), pages 167-189, March.
    10. Sreejesh, S & Singha, Souvik, 2026. "Reconciling consumer intuition and machine: Algorithmic intuition conflict and the design of Consumer–AI collaboration," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    11. Frank, Darius-Aurel & Chrysochou, Polymeros & Mitkidis, Panagiotis & Otterbring, Tobias & Ariely, Dan, 2024. "Navigating uncertainty: Exploring consumer acceptance of artificial intelligence under self-threats and high-stakes decisions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    12. Wang, Shaofeng & Zhang, Hao, 2025. "Artificial intelligence digital employees and sustainable innovation in online retail: The mediating role of ambidextrous green innovation and the moderating role of ethical anxiety," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    13. Li, Jian & Huang, Jinsong & Li, Yaqi, 2023. "Examining the effects of authenticity fit and association fit: A digital human avatar endorsement model," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    14. Martin Adam & Konstantin Roethke & Alexander Benlian, 2023. "Human vs. Automated Sales Agents: How and Why Customer Responses Shift Across Sales Stages," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1148-1168, September.
    15. Marina Chugunova & Wolfgang J. Luhan, 2022. "Ruled by robots: Preference for algorithmic decision makers and perceptions of their choices," Working Papers in Economics & Finance 2022-03, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth Business School, Economics and Finance Subject Group.
    16. Wang, Cuicui & Li, Yiyang & Fu, Weizhong & Jin, Jia, 2023. "Whether to trust chatbots: Applying the event-related approach to understand consumers’ emotional experiences in interactions with chatbots in e-commerce," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    17. Juan Wu & Zhe & Zhang & Amit Mehra, 2026. "When Is Self-Disclosure Optimal? Incentives and Governance of AI-Generated Content," Papers 2601.18654, arXiv.org.
    18. Harvey, Nigel & De Baets, Shari, 2025. "Factors affecting preferences between judgmental and algorithmic forecasts: Feedback, guidance and labeling effects," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 532-553.
    19. Chacon, Alvaro & Martínez-Troncoso, Carolina & Kausel, Edgar E., 2025. "Customer behavior in the presence of algorithmic marketing agents: The role of hedonic values," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    20. Christopher Robertson & Andrew Woods & Kelly Bergstrand & Jess Findley & Cayley Balser & Marvin J Slepian, 2023. "Diverse patients’ attitudes towards Artificial Intelligence (AI) in diagnosis," PLOS Digital Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(5), pages 1-16, May.

    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:82:y:2025:i:c:s0160791x25000521. 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.