Aversion to Hiring Algorithms: Transparency, Gender Profiling, and Self-Confidence

References

• Aoki N (2020) An experimental study of public trust in AI chatbots in the public sector. Government Inform. Quart. 37(4):101490.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aridor G, Che Y-K, Salz T (2020) The economic consequences of data privacy regulation: Empirical evidence from GDPR. NBER Working Paper No. 26900, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Auster S, Pavoni N (2024) Optimal delegation and information transmission under limited awareness. Theoret. Econom. 19(1):245–284.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Avery M, Leibbrandt A, Vecci J (2023) Does artificial intelligence help or hurt gender diversity? Evidence from two field experiments on recruitment in tech. Preprint, submitted February 14, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4370805.Google Scholar
• Badakhshan E, Humphreys P, Maguire L, McIvor R (2020) Using simulation-based system dynamics and genetic algorithms to reduce the cash flow bullwhip in the supply chain. Internat. J. Production Res. 58(17):5253–5279.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baesens B, Van Gestel T, Viaene S, Stepanova M, Suykens J, Vanthienen J (2003) Benchmarking state-of-the-art classification algorithms for credit scoring. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 54(6):627–635.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bajari P, Chernozhukov V, Hortaçsu A, Suzuki J (2019) The impact of big data on firm performance: An empirical investigation. AEA Papers Proc. 109(1):33–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barocas S, Selbst AD (2016) Big data’s disparate impact. Calif. Law Rev. 104(3):671–732.Google Scholar
• Barron K, Ditlmann R, Gehrig S, Schweighofer-Kodritsch S (2022) Explicit and implicit belief-based gender discrimination: A hiring experiment. Management Sci., ePub ahead of print May 14, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.01229.Google Scholar
• Bertrand M, Duflo E (2017) Field experiments on discrimination. Banerjee A, Duflo E, eds. Handbook of Field Experiments (North Holland, Amsterdam), 309–393.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bigman YE, Gray K (2018) People are averse to machines making moral decisions. Cognition 181:21–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bigman YE, Wilson D, Arnestad MN, Waytz A, Gray K (2023) Algorithmic discrimination causes less moral outrage than human discrimination. J. Experiment. Psych. General 152(1):4–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blau FD, Kahn LM (2017) The gender wage gap: Extent, trends, and explanations. J. Econom. Lit. 55(3):789–865.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bolton GE, Katok E, Ockenfels A (2004) How effective are online reputation mechanisms? An experimental study. Management Sci. 50(11):1587–1602.Link, Google Scholar
• Camerer C, Lovallo D (1999) Overconfidence and excess entry: An experimental approach. Amer. Econom. Rev. 89(1):306–318.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camuffo A, Cordova A, Gambardella A, Spina C (2020) A scientific approach to entrepreneurial decision making. Management Sci. 66(2):564–586.Link, Google Scholar
• Carey D, Smith M (2016) How companies are using simulations, competitions, and analytics to hire. Harvard Bus. Rev. (April 22), https://hbr.org/2016/04/how-companies-are-using-simulations-competitions-and-analytics-to-hire.Google Scholar
• Castelo N, Bos MW, Lehmann DR (2019) Task-dependent algorithm aversion. J. Marketing Res. 56(5):809–825.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chalfin A, Danieli O, Hillis A, Jelveh Z, Luca M, Ludwig J, Mullainathan S (2016) Productivity and selection of human capital with machine learning. Amer. Econom. Rev. 106(5):124–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charles KK, Guryan J (2011) Studying discrimination: Fundamental challenges and recent progress. Annual Rev. Econom. 3(1):479–511.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chugunova M, Luhan WJ (2022) Ruled by robots: Preference for algorithmic decision makers and perceptions of their choices. Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition Research Paper 22-04, Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
• Corgnet B (2023) An experimental test of algorithmic dismissals. Working Paper 2302, GATE Lyon-St-Étienne, Université de Lyon, Lyon, France.Google Scholar
• Cowgill B (2020) Bias and productivity in humans and algorithms: Theory and evidence from resume screening. Columbia Business School Research Paper, Columbia University, New York.Google Scholar
• Cowgill B, Tucker C (2020) Algorithmic fairness and economics. Preprint, submitted February 14, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3361280.Google Scholar
• Cowgill B, Dell’Acqua D, Matz S (2020a) The managerial effects of algorithmic fairness activism. AEA Papers Proc. 110:85–90.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cowgill B, Dell’Acqua F, Deng S, Hsu D, Verma N, Chaintreau A (2020b) Biased programmers? Or biased data? A field experiment in operationalizing AI ethics. Proc. 21st ACM Conf. Econom. Comput. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 679–681.Google Scholar
• Danz D, Kübler D, Mechtenberg L, Schmid J (2015) On the failure of hindsight-biased principals to delegate optimally. Management Sci. 61(8):1938–1958.Link, Google Scholar
• Dargnies MP, Hakimov R, Kübler D (2019) Self-confidence and unraveling in matching markets. Management Sci. 65(12):5603–5618.Link, Google Scholar
• Dietvorst BJ, Simmons JP, Massey C (2015) Algorithm aversion: People erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err. J. Experiment. Psych. General 144(1):114–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dietvorst BJ, Simmons JP, Massey C (2018) Overcoming algorithm aversion: People will use imperfect algorithms if they can (even slightly) modify them. Management Sci. 64(3):1155–1170.Link, Google Scholar
• Dunning D, Heath C, Suls JM (2004) Flawed self-assessment: Implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psych. Sci. Public Interest 5(3):69–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ertac S, Gumren M, Gurdal MY (2020) Demand for decision autonomy and the desire to avoid responsibility in risky environments: Experimental evidence. J. Econom. Psych. 77:102200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fildes R, Goodwin P (2007) Against your better judgment? How organizations can improve their use of management judgment in forecasting. Interfaces 37(6):570–576.Link, Google Scholar
• Fumagalli E, Rezaei S, Salomons A (2022) OK computer: Worker perceptions of algorithmic recruitment. Res. Policy 51(2):104420.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goodman B, Flaxman S (2017) European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a “right to explanation.” AI Magazine 38(3):50–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greiner B, Grünwald P, Lindner T, Lintner G, Wiernsperger M (2024) Incentives, framing, and reliance on algorithmic advice: An experimental study (No. 01/2024). WU Vienna University of Economics and Business, Wien, Austria.Google Scholar
• Grigoryan A (2022) Transparency in allocation problems. Preprint, submitted March 15, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139.ssrn.4084156.Google Scholar
• Hajian S, Domingo-Ferrer J (2012) A methodology for direct and indirect discrimination prevention in data mining. IEEE Trans. Knowledge Data Engrg. 25(7):1445–1459.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hakimov R, Raghavan M (2022) Improving transparency in school admissions: Theory and experiment. WZB Berlin Social Science Center, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.Google Scholar
• Highhouse S (2008) Stubborn reliance on intuition and subjectivity in employee selection. Indust. Organ. Psych. 1(3):333–342.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jussupow E, Benbasat I, Heinzl A (2020) Why are we averse toward algorithms? A comprehensive literature review on algorithm aversion. Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies 138565, Darmstadt Technical University, Darmstadt, Germany.Google Scholar
• Kaibel C, Koch-Bayram I, Biemann T, Mühlenbock M (2019) Applicant perceptions of hiring algorithms - Uniqueness and discrimination experiences as moderators. Proc. Acad. Management 2019(1):1–6.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim H, Glaeser EL, Hillis A, Kominers SD, Luca M (2024) Decision authority and the returns to algorithms. Strategic Management J. 45(4):619–648.Google Scholar
• Kimbrough SO, Wu DJ, Zhong F (2002) Computers play the beer game: Can artificial agents manage supply chains? Decision Support Systems 33(3):323–333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kizilcec RF (2016) How much information? Effects of transparency on trust in an algorithmic interface. CHI ‘16 Proc. 2016 CHI Conf. Human Factors Comput. Systems (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 2390–2395.Google Scholar
• Kleinberg J, Lakkaraju H, Leskovec J, Ludwig J, Mullainathan S (2018) Human decisions and machine predictions. Quart. J. Econom. 133(1):237–293.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lambrecht A, Tucker CE (2019) Algorithmic bias? An empirical study into apparent gender-based discrimination in the display of STEM career ads. Management Sci. 65(7):2966–2981.Link, Google Scholar
• Lane T (2016) Discrimination in the laboratory: A meta-analysis of economics experiments. Eur. Econom. Rev. 90:375–402.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee MK (2018) Understanding perception of algorithmic decisions: Fairness, trust, and emotion in response to algorithmic management. Big Data Soc. 5(1).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malmendier U, Tate G (2005) CEO overconfidence and corporate investment. J. Finance 60(6):2661–2700.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Möbius MM, Niederle M, Niehaus P, Rosenblat TS (2022) Managing self-confidence: Theory and experimental evidence. Management Sci. 68(11):7793–8514.Link, Google Scholar
• Moore DA, Healy PJ (2008) The trouble with overconfidence. Psych. Rev. 115(2):502–517.Google Scholar
• Persson A (2016) Implicit bias in predictive data profiling within recruitments. Lehman A, Whitehouse D, FischerHubner S, Fritsch L, Raab C, eds. Privacy and Identity Management: Facing Up to Next Steps. IFIP International Summer School on Privacy and Identity Management (Springer, Berlin), 212–230.Google Scholar
• Sanders NR, Manrodt KB (2003) The efficacy of using judgmental vs. quantitative forecasting methods in practice. Omega 31(6):511–522.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sarsons H, Gërxhani K, Reuben E, Schram A (2021) Gender differences in recognition for group work. J. Political Econom. 129(1):101–147.Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Eschenbach WJ (2021) Transparency and the black box problem: Why we do not trust AI. Philos. Tech. 34(4):1607–1622.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vrieze SI, Grove WM (2009) Survey on the use of clinical and mechanical prediction methods in clinical psychology. Professional Psych. Res. Practice 40(5):525–531.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Will P, Krpan D, Lordan G (2023) People versus machines: Introducing the HIRE framework. Artificial Intelligence Rev. 56(2):1071–1100.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yeomans M, Shah A, Mullainathan S, Kleinberg J (2019) Making sense of recommendations. J. Behav. Decision Making 32(4):403–414.Crossref, Google Scholar