IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tse/iastwp/127526.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Humans Feel Too Special for Machines to Score Their Morals

Author

Listed:
  • Purcell, Zoe
  • Bonnefon, Jean-François

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) can be harnessed to create sophisticated social and moral scoring systems —enabling people and organizations to form judgements of others at scale. However, it also poses significant ethical challenges and is, subsequently, the subject of wide debate. As these technologies are developed and governing bodies face regulatory decisions, it is crucial that we understand the attraction or resistance that people have for AI moral scoring. Across four experiments, we show that the acceptability of moral scoring by AI is related to expectations about the quality of those scores, but that expectations about quality are compromised by people's tendency to see themselves as morally peculiar. We demonstrate that people overestimate the peculiarity of their moral profile, believe that AI will neglect this peculiarity, and resist for this reason the introduction of moral scoring by AI.

Suggested Citation

  • Purcell, Zoe & Bonnefon, Jean-François, 2022. "Humans Feel Too Special for Machines to Score Their Morals," IAST Working Papers 22-146, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    • Handle: RePEc:tse:iastwp:127526
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://iast.fr/pub/127526
    File Function: null
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.iast.fr/sites/default/files/IAST/wp/wp_iast_146.pdf
    File Function: Full Text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Artificial Intelligence; social credit scoring; ethics; consumer psychology;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making

    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:tse:iastwp:127526. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iasttfr.html .

    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.