Abstract:With the advent of artificial intelligence (AI) based systems, a new era has begun. Decisions that were once made by humans are now increasingly being made by these advanced systems, with the inevitable consequence of our growing reliance on AI in many aspects of our lives. At the same time, the opaque nature of AI-based systems and the possibility of unintentional or hidden discriminatory practices and biases raises profound questions not only about the mechanics of AI, but also about how users perceive the fairness of these systems. We hypothesize that providing various explanations for AI decision-making processes and output may enhance users' fairness perceptions and make them trust the system and adopt its decisions. Hence, we devised an online between-subject experiment that explores users' fairness and comprehension perceptions of AI systems with respect to the explanations provided by the system, employing a case study of a managerial decision in the human resources (HR) domain. We manipulated (i) the decision-maker (AI or human); (ii) the input (candidate characteristics); (iii) the output (recommendation valence), and (iv) the explanation style. We examined the effect of the various manipulations (and individuals' demographic and personality characteristics) using multivariate ordinal regression. We also performed a multi-level analysis of experiment components to examine the effects of the decision-maker type, explanation style, and their combination. The results suggest three main conclusions. The first conclusion is that there is a gap in users' fairness and comprehension perception of AI-based decision making systems compared to human decision making. The second conclusion is that knowing that an AI-based system provided the decisions negatively affects users' fairness and comprehension perceptions, compared to knowing that humans made the decision. Finally, the third conclusion is that providing case-based, certification-based, or sensitivity-based explanations can narrow this gap and may even eliminate it. Additionally, we found that users' fairness and comprehension perceptions are influenced by a variety of factors such as the input, output, and explanation provided by the system, as well as by individuals' age, education, computer skills, and personality. Our findings may help to understand when and how to use explanations to improve users' perceptions regarding AI-based decision-making. CCS CONCEPTS • Human computer interaction (HCI) → HCI design and evaluation methods → User studies • Human-centered computing → Human computer interaction (HCI) → Empirical studies in HCI • Applied computing → Law, social and behavioral sciences → Sociology

Human-Machine Collaborative Decision-Making in Organizations: Examining the Impact of Algorithm Prediction Bias on Decision Bias and Perceived Fairness

When the Automated Fire Backfires: the Adoption of Algorithm-based HR Decision-making Could Induce Consumer's Unfavorable Ethicality Inferences of the Company

On the Fairness of Machine-Assisted Human Decisions

Deciding Fast and Slow: The Role of Cognitive Biases in AI-assisted Decision-making

Fair Machine Guidance to Enhance Fair Decision Making in Biased People

Can AI Algorithmic Decision-making Improve Employees’ Perception of Procedural Fairness?

Using Machine Bias To Measure Human Bias

Integrating Behavioral, Economic, and Technical Insights to Understand and Address Algorithmic Bias: A Human-Centric Perspective

Understanding Relations Between Perception of Fairness and Trust in Algorithmic Decision Making

Human Perceptions of Fairness in Algorithmic Decision Making: A Case Study of Criminal Risk Prediction

The impact of AI errors in a human-in-the-loop process

Automating Automaticity: How the Context of Human Choice Affects the Extent of Algorithmic Bias

Who Made That Decision and Why? Users' Perceptions of Human Versus AI Decision-Making and the Power of Explainable-AI

Can Robotic Cues Manipulate Human Decisions? Exploring Consensus Building via Bias-Controlled Non-linear Opinion Dynamics and Robotic Eye Gaze Mediated Interaction in Human-Robot Teaming

Human-AI Interactions in Public Sector Decision-Making: "Automation Bias" and "Selective Adherence" to Algorithmic Advice

Factors Influencing Perceived Fairness in Algorithmic Decision-Making: Algorithm Outcomes, Development Procedures, and Individual Differences

Machine Decisions and Human Consequences

A Broader View on Bias in Automated Decision-Making: Reflecting on Epistemology and Dynamics

Biased Programmers? Or Biased Data? A Field Experiment in Operationalizing AI Ethics

Bending the Automation Bias Curve: A Study of Human and AI-based Decision Making in National Security Contexts

HUMAN DECISIONS AND MACHINE PREDICTIONS