Abstract
In group decision-making, the behavior of each member is sensitive to the social influence of other majority members. Research on majority influence has shown that multiple non-human agents with anthropomorphic cues can exert normative pressure on a lone human decision-maker. However, how individuals perceive and respond to minority influence exerted by a lone machine is rarely discussed. Hence, a between-subjects experiment was conducted to examine how different minority identity (human vs artificial intelligence [AI]) and specialization (specialist vs generalist) cues influence individuals’ perceptions and behavior in response to moral dilemmas in a joint human–AI group. The results confirmed the significant role of specialization cues in predicting in-group identification, source credibility, and conversion behavior. In addition, the participants perceived the human minority as more credible than the AI minority, which prompted conversion behavior when the minority was labeled as a specialist rather than as a generalist.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
