PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 22, 2026Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making1 citations

Human or AI Advice? Examining Trust, Influence, and Responsibility in Ethically Charged Human-AI Team Decision-Making

View Full Paper
BSBeau G. SchelbleCFChristopher FlathmannHAHeba Aly

Key Points

  • The research examines the impact of human versus AI expert advisors on ethical decision-making and trust.
  • Participants engaged in scenarios with human or AI expert advisors influencing decisions.
  • The influence of the advisors was manipulated to be low or high.
  • Outcomes measured included stress levels, responsibility perceptions, and trust.
  • The study involved analysis of interactions and decision-making processes.
  • Participants reported lower stress when paired with AI advisors.
  • AI advisors were perceived to perform worse than human advisors.
  • High influence from expert advisors led to significantly less stress.
  • Trust and perceived performance varied based on advisor identity.

Abstract

AI systems are rapidly being placed in positions where they can directly influence decisions that require a strong consideration of ethics. This article reports on an experiment in which humans worked with a teammate acting as an expert advisor with expert-level knowledge, who informed and influenced their ethical decision-making. The identity of this expert advisor was manipulated to be either human or AI, and the influence exerted by the expert advisor was manipulated to be either low or high. Further, participants completed four scenarios, each exploring a different ethically charged decision. Results indicated that working with an AI teammate expert advisor led participants to perceive significantly lower levels of stress and responsibility when making ethical decisions, but AI expert advisors were also perceived as performing worse than human expert advisors. Additionally, when expert advisors exerted high influence levels, participants felt significantly less stress during the decision-making process. Finally, the scenario and ethical decisions made by participants had pervasive effects on trust, trustworthiness, perceived performance, and perceived power for both human and AI expert advisors. Future research efforts must ensure that the use of AI expert advisors in human-AI teams does not reduce the responsibility humans bear when making various ethical decisions.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Schelble et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69bf393dc7b3c90b18b43928https://doi.org/10.1177/15553434261434613
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives1999 · 108,216 citations
  2. 2Individualized Mutual Adaptation in Human-Agent Teams2021 · 22 citations
  3. 3Similar Psychological Distance Reduces Temporal Discounting2013 · 92 citations
  4. 4Bias and Unfairness in Machine Learning Models: A Systematic Review on Datasets, Tools, Fairness Metrics, and Identification and Mitigation Methods2023 · 304 citations
  5. 5The bigger they are, the harder they fall: Linking team power, team conflict, and performance2011 · 137 citations