(De)Noise: Moderating the Inconsistency Between Human Decision-Makers

Fuente: arXiv
Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Grgić-Hlača, Nina, Ali, Junaid, Gummadi, Krishna P., Vaughan, Jennifer Wortman
Formato: Preprint
Publicado: 2024
Materias:
Acceso en línea:
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
_version_ 1866909256929771520
author Grgić-Hlača, Nina
Ali, Junaid
Gummadi, Krishna P.
Vaughan, Jennifer Wortman
author_facet Grgić-Hlača, Nina
Ali, Junaid
Gummadi, Krishna P.
Vaughan, Jennifer Wortman
contents Prior research in psychology has found that people's decisions are often inconsistent. An individual's decisions vary across time, and decisions vary even more across people. Inconsistencies have been identified not only in subjective matters, like matters of taste, but also in settings one might expect to be more objective, such as sentencing, job performance evaluations, or real estate appraisals. In our study, we explore whether algorithmic decision aids can be used to moderate the degree of inconsistency in human decision-making in the context of real estate appraisal. In a large-scale human-subject experiment, we study how different forms of algorithmic assistance influence the way that people review and update their estimates of real estate prices. We find that both (i) asking respondents to review their estimates in a series of algorithmically chosen pairwise comparisons and (ii) providing respondents with traditional machine advice are effective strategies for influencing human responses. Compared to simply reviewing initial estimates one by one, the aforementioned strategies lead to (i) a higher propensity to update initial estimates, (ii) a higher accuracy of post-review estimates, and (iii) a higher degree of consistency between the post-review estimates of different respondents. While these effects are more pronounced with traditional machine advice, the approach of reviewing algorithmically chosen pairs can be implemented in a wider range of settings, since it does not require access to ground truth data.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2407_11225
institution arXiv
publishDate 2024
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle (De)Noise: Moderating the Inconsistency Between Human Decision-Makers
Grgić-Hlača, Nina
Ali, Junaid
Gummadi, Krishna P.
Vaughan, Jennifer Wortman
Human-Computer Interaction
Computers and Society
Prior research in psychology has found that people's decisions are often inconsistent. An individual's decisions vary across time, and decisions vary even more across people. Inconsistencies have been identified not only in subjective matters, like matters of taste, but also in settings one might expect to be more objective, such as sentencing, job performance evaluations, or real estate appraisals. In our study, we explore whether algorithmic decision aids can be used to moderate the degree of inconsistency in human decision-making in the context of real estate appraisal. In a large-scale human-subject experiment, we study how different forms of algorithmic assistance influence the way that people review and update their estimates of real estate prices. We find that both (i) asking respondents to review their estimates in a series of algorithmically chosen pairwise comparisons and (ii) providing respondents with traditional machine advice are effective strategies for influencing human responses. Compared to simply reviewing initial estimates one by one, the aforementioned strategies lead to (i) a higher propensity to update initial estimates, (ii) a higher accuracy of post-review estimates, and (iii) a higher degree of consistency between the post-review estimates of different respondents. While these effects are more pronounced with traditional machine advice, the approach of reviewing algorithmically chosen pairs can be implemented in a wider range of settings, since it does not require access to ground truth data.
title (De)Noise: Moderating the Inconsistency Between Human Decision-Makers
topic Human-Computer Interaction
Computers and Society
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.11225