IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ems/eureri/115830.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cognitive challenges in human-AI collaboration: Investigating the path towards productive delegation

Author

Listed:
  • Fügener, A.
  • Grahl, J.
  • Gupta, A.
  • Ketter, W.

Abstract

We study how humans make decisions when they collaborate with an artificial intelligence (AI): each instance of a classification task could be classified by themselves or by the AI. Experimental results suggest that humans and AI who work together can outperform the superior AI when it works alone. However, this only occurred when the AI delegated work to humans, not when humans delegated work to the AI. The AI profited, even from working with low-performing subjects, but humans did not delegate well. This bad delegation performance cannot be explained with algorithm aversion. On the contrary, subjects tried to follow a provided delegation strategy diligently and appeared to appreciate the AI support. However, human results suffered due to a lack of metaknowledge. They were not able to assess their own capabilities correctly, which in turn leads to poor delegation decisions. In contrast to reluctance to use AI, lacking metaknowledge is an unconscious trait. It limits fundamentally how well human decision makers can collaborate with AI and other algorithms. The results have implications for the future of work, the design of human-AI collaborative environments and education in the digital age.

Suggested Citation

  • Fügener, A. & Grahl, J. & Gupta, A. & Ketter, W., 2019. "Cognitive challenges in human-AI collaboration: Investigating the path towards productive delegation," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2019-003-LIS, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
  • Handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:115830
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repub.eur.nl/pub/115830/ERS-2019-003-LIS_v1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    2. Micha T. Kahlen & Wolfgang Ketter & Jan van Dalen, 2018. "Electric Vehicle Virtual Power Plant Dilemma: Grid Balancing Versus Customer Mobility," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 27(11), pages 2054-2070, November.
    3. Martin Bichler & Alok Gupta & Wolfgang Ketter, 2010. "Research Commentary ---Designing Smart Markets," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 688-699, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Konstantina Valogianni & Wolfgang Ketter & John Collins & Dmitry Zhdanov, 2020. "Sustainable Electric Vehicle Charging using Adaptive Pricing," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(6), pages 1550-1572, June.
    2. Torgler, Benno & Schneider, Friedrich & Schaltegger, Christoph A., 2007. "With or Against the People? The Impact of a Bottom-Up Approach on Tax Morale and the Shadow Economy," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt6331x6vz, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    3. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    4. Christina Leuker & Thorsten Pachur & Ralph Hertwig & Timothy J. Pleskac, 2019. "Do people exploit risk–reward structures to simplify information processing in risky choice?," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 76-94, August.
    5. Jae Wook Yoo & Richard Reed & Shung Jae Shin & David J. Lemak, 2009. "Strategic Choice and Performance in Late Movers: Influence of the Top Management Team's External Ties," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 308-335, March.
    6. Giovanni Calice & Levent Kutlu & Ming Zeng, 2021. "Understanding US firm efficiency and its asset pricing implications," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 803-827, February.
    7. José Castro Caldas & Helder Coelho, 1999. "The Origin of Institutions: Socio-Economic Processes, Choice, Norms and Conventions," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 2(2), pages 1-1.
    8. Nagler Matthew G., 2007. "Understanding the Internet's Relevance to Media Ownership Policy: A Model of Too Many Choices," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-28, June.
    9. Steffen S. Bettin, 2020. "Electricity infrastructure and innovation in the next phase of energy transition—amendments to the technology innovation system framework," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 371-395, November.
    10. Lawrence Bunnell & Kweku-Muata Osei-Bryson & Victoria Y. Yoon, 0. "RecSys Issues Ontology: A Knowledge Classification of Issues for Recommender Systems Researchers," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-42.
    11. David Schneider & Johannes Klumpe & Martin Adam & Alexander Benlian, 2020. "Nudging users into digital service solutions," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(4), pages 863-881, December.
    12. da Silveira, Jaylson Jair & Lima, Gilberto Tadeu, 2021. "Wage inequality as a source of endogenous macroeconomic fluctuations," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 35-52.
    13. Nathan N. Cheek & Jacob Goebel, 2020. "What does it mean to maximize? “Decision difficulty,†indecisiveness, and the jingle-jangle fallacies in the measurement of maximizing," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(1), pages 7-24, January.
    14. Marianne Bertrand & Dean Karlin & Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir & Jonathan Zinman, 2005. "What's Psychology Worth? A Field Experiment in the Consumer Credit Market," NBER Working Papers 11892, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Khraibani, R. & de Palma, A. & Picard, N. & Kaysi, I., 2016. "A new evaluation and decision making framework investigating the elimination-by-aspects model in the context of transportation projects' investment choices," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 67-81.
    16. Martinovici, A., 2019. "Revealing attention - how eye movements predict brand choice and moment of choice," Other publications TiSEM 7dca38a5-9f78-4aee-bd81-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    18. Hitge, Gerhard & Joubert, Johan W., 2021. "A nodal approach for estimating potential cycling demand," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    19. Yudistira Permana, 2020. "Explaining satisficing through risk aversion," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 89(4), pages 503-525, November.
    20. DeCanio, Stephen J. & Watkins, William E., 1998. "Information processing and organizational structure," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 275-294, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Future of work; Artificial Intelligence; Deep Learning; Machine Learning; Deep Learning; Human-AI Collaboration; Machine Learning; Intelligent Software Agents;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ems:eureri:115830. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erimanl.html .

    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: RePub (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erimanl.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.