The Human Black-Box: The Illusion of Understanding Human Better Than Algorithmic Decision-Making

As algorithms increasingly replace human decision-makers, concerns have been voiced about the black-box nature of algorithmic decision-making. These concerns raise an apparent paradox. In many cases, human decision-makers are just as much of a black-box as the algorithms that are meant to replace th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of experimental psychology. General 2022-09, Vol.151 (9), p.2250-2258
Hauptverfasser: Bonezzi, Andrea, Ostinelli, Massimiliano, Melzner, Johann
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2258
container_issue 9
container_start_page 2250
container_title Journal of experimental psychology. General
container_volume 151
creator Bonezzi, Andrea
Ostinelli, Massimiliano
Melzner, Johann
description As algorithms increasingly replace human decision-makers, concerns have been voiced about the black-box nature of algorithmic decision-making. These concerns raise an apparent paradox. In many cases, human decision-makers are just as much of a black-box as the algorithms that are meant to replace them. Yet, the inscrutability of human decision-making seems to raise fewer concerns. We suggest that one of the reasons for this paradox is that people foster an illusion of understanding human better than algorithmic decision-making, when in fact, both are black-boxes. We further propose that this occurs, at least in part, because people project their own intuitive understanding of a decision-making process more onto other humans than onto algorithms, and as a result, believe that they understand human better than algorithmic decision-making, when in fact, this is merely an illusion.
doi_str_mv 10.1037/xge0001181
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2628299379</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2717872435</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a381t-c47ca005177c95f0cdc3f9990416fd667382e61344733fd2201fc02cd49b7bfe3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp90U1PwyAcBnBiNDpfLn4A08SLMan-gbYUb26-bMmMl-2MjMLs1tIJbTK_vSxzmniQC4T8eAI8CJ1juMFA2e16rgEA4xzvoR7mlMckjH3UA-BZTJMkPULH3i8CAppnh-iIpjihJMl76G3yrqNhV0sb9SuplnG_Wd9Fm81RVXW-bGzUmGhqC-18K21R2vmO67bVLtCwvq_mjSvb97pU0YNW5eZc_CKXQZ-iAyMrr8--5xM0fXqcDIbx-PV5NLgfx5LmuI1VwpQESDFjiqcGVKGo4ZxDgjNTZBmjOdEZDo9hlJqCEMBGAVFFwmdsZjQ9QVfb3JVrPjrtW1GXXumqklY3nRckIznhnDIe6OUfumg6Z8PtBGGY5YwkNP1XZYSR8PXAgrreKuUa7502YuXKWrpPgUFs2hG_7QR88R3ZzWpd_NBdHQHEWyBXUqz8p5KuLVWlveqc07bdhAmcYsEFISnQL-mXl1A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2627210307</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Human Black-Box: The Illusion of Understanding Human Better Than Algorithmic Decision-Making</title><source>APA PsycARTICLES</source><creator>Bonezzi, Andrea ; Ostinelli, Massimiliano ; Melzner, Johann</creator><contributor>Cowan, Nelson</contributor><creatorcontrib>Bonezzi, Andrea ; Ostinelli, Massimiliano ; Melzner, Johann ; Cowan, Nelson</creatorcontrib><description>As algorithms increasingly replace human decision-makers, concerns have been voiced about the black-box nature of algorithmic decision-making. These concerns raise an apparent paradox. In many cases, human decision-makers are just as much of a black-box as the algorithms that are meant to replace them. Yet, the inscrutability of human decision-making seems to raise fewer concerns. We suggest that one of the reasons for this paradox is that people foster an illusion of understanding human better than algorithmic decision-making, when in fact, both are black-boxes. We further propose that this occurs, at least in part, because people project their own intuitive understanding of a decision-making process more onto other humans than onto algorithms, and as a result, believe that they understand human better than algorithmic decision-making, when in fact, this is merely an illusion.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0096-3445</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-2222</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/xge0001181</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35143248</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Aversion ; Cognitive Processes ; Decision analysis ; Decision Making ; Female ; Human ; Intuition ; Male</subject><ispartof>Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2022-09, Vol.151 (9), p.2250-2258</ispartof><rights>2022 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2022, American Psychological Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Sep 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a381t-c47ca005177c95f0cdc3f9990416fd667382e61344733fd2201fc02cd49b7bfe3</citedby><orcidid>0000-0002-5624-8406</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35143248$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Cowan, Nelson</contributor><creatorcontrib>Bonezzi, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ostinelli, Massimiliano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melzner, Johann</creatorcontrib><title>The Human Black-Box: The Illusion of Understanding Human Better Than Algorithmic Decision-Making</title><title>Journal of experimental psychology. General</title><addtitle>J Exp Psychol Gen</addtitle><description>As algorithms increasingly replace human decision-makers, concerns have been voiced about the black-box nature of algorithmic decision-making. These concerns raise an apparent paradox. In many cases, human decision-makers are just as much of a black-box as the algorithms that are meant to replace them. Yet, the inscrutability of human decision-making seems to raise fewer concerns. We suggest that one of the reasons for this paradox is that people foster an illusion of understanding human better than algorithmic decision-making, when in fact, both are black-boxes. We further propose that this occurs, at least in part, because people project their own intuitive understanding of a decision-making process more onto other humans than onto algorithms, and as a result, believe that they understand human better than algorithmic decision-making, when in fact, this is merely an illusion.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Aversion</subject><subject>Cognitive Processes</subject><subject>Decision analysis</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Intuition</subject><subject>Male</subject><issn>0096-3445</issn><issn>1939-2222</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp90U1PwyAcBnBiNDpfLn4A08SLMan-gbYUb26-bMmMl-2MjMLs1tIJbTK_vSxzmniQC4T8eAI8CJ1juMFA2e16rgEA4xzvoR7mlMckjH3UA-BZTJMkPULH3i8CAppnh-iIpjihJMl76G3yrqNhV0sb9SuplnG_Wd9Fm81RVXW-bGzUmGhqC-18K21R2vmO67bVLtCwvq_mjSvb97pU0YNW5eZc_CKXQZ-iAyMrr8--5xM0fXqcDIbx-PV5NLgfx5LmuI1VwpQESDFjiqcGVKGo4ZxDgjNTZBmjOdEZDo9hlJqCEMBGAVFFwmdsZjQ9QVfb3JVrPjrtW1GXXumqklY3nRckIznhnDIe6OUfumg6Z8PtBGGY5YwkNP1XZYSR8PXAgrreKuUa7502YuXKWrpPgUFs2hG_7QR88R3ZzWpd_NBdHQHEWyBXUqz8p5KuLVWlveqc07bdhAmcYsEFISnQL-mXl1A</recordid><startdate>20220901</startdate><enddate>20220901</enddate><creator>Bonezzi, Andrea</creator><creator>Ostinelli, Massimiliano</creator><creator>Melzner, Johann</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5624-8406</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220901</creationdate><title>The Human Black-Box: The Illusion of Understanding Human Better Than Algorithmic Decision-Making</title><author>Bonezzi, Andrea ; Ostinelli, Massimiliano ; Melzner, Johann</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a381t-c47ca005177c95f0cdc3f9990416fd667382e61344733fd2201fc02cd49b7bfe3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Aversion</topic><topic>Cognitive Processes</topic><topic>Decision analysis</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Intuition</topic><topic>Male</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bonezzi, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ostinelli, Massimiliano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melzner, Johann</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Access via APA PsycArticles® (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of experimental psychology. General</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bonezzi, Andrea</au><au>Ostinelli, Massimiliano</au><au>Melzner, Johann</au><au>Cowan, Nelson</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Human Black-Box: The Illusion of Understanding Human Better Than Algorithmic Decision-Making</atitle><jtitle>Journal of experimental psychology. General</jtitle><addtitle>J Exp Psychol Gen</addtitle><date>2022-09-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>151</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>2250</spage><epage>2258</epage><pages>2250-2258</pages><issn>0096-3445</issn><eissn>1939-2222</eissn><abstract>As algorithms increasingly replace human decision-makers, concerns have been voiced about the black-box nature of algorithmic decision-making. These concerns raise an apparent paradox. In many cases, human decision-makers are just as much of a black-box as the algorithms that are meant to replace them. Yet, the inscrutability of human decision-making seems to raise fewer concerns. We suggest that one of the reasons for this paradox is that people foster an illusion of understanding human better than algorithmic decision-making, when in fact, both are black-boxes. We further propose that this occurs, at least in part, because people project their own intuitive understanding of a decision-making process more onto other humans than onto algorithms, and as a result, believe that they understand human better than algorithmic decision-making, when in fact, this is merely an illusion.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><pmid>35143248</pmid><doi>10.1037/xge0001181</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5624-8406</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0096-3445
ispartof Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2022-09, Vol.151 (9), p.2250-2258
issn 0096-3445
1939-2222
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2628299379
source APA PsycARTICLES
subjects Algorithms
Aversion
Cognitive Processes
Decision analysis
Decision Making
Female
Human
Intuition
Male
title The Human Black-Box: The Illusion of Understanding Human Better Than Algorithmic Decision-Making
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T18%3A08%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Human%20Black-Box:%20The%20Illusion%20of%20Understanding%20Human%20Better%20Than%20Algorithmic%20Decision-Making&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20experimental%20psychology.%20General&rft.au=Bonezzi,%20Andrea&rft.date=2022-09-01&rft.volume=151&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=2250&rft.epage=2258&rft.pages=2250-2258&rft.issn=0096-3445&rft.eissn=1939-2222&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/xge0001181&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2717872435%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2627210307&rft_id=info:pmid/35143248&rfr_iscdi=true