ArticlePloS one2021
The influence of algorithms on political and dating decisions.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- The Answer Bot Effect (ABE): A powerful new form of influence made possible by intelligent personal assistants and search engines.PloS one · 2022Trial
- Warning people about the risk of AI error mitigates human acquisition of AI bias.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Networks of Negativity: Gaining Attention Through Cyberbullying.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- The impact of AI errors in a human-in-the-loop process.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Article
- Article
- Humans inherit artificial intelligence biases.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Threats by artificial intelligence to human health and human existence.BMJ global health · 2023Review
- Algorithmic accountability on social media platforms in the context of alcohol-related health behavior change.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2023Article
- Article
- Assessing Emotion and Sensitivity of AI Artwork.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence algorithms are ubiquitous in daily life, and this is motivating the development of some institutional initiatives to ensure trustworthiness in Artificial Intelligence (AI). However, there is not enough research on how these algorithms can influence people's decisions and attitudes. The present research examines whether algorithms can persuade people, explicitly or covertly, on whom to vote and date, or whether, by contrast, people would reject their influence in an attempt to confirm their personal freedom and independence. In four experiments, we found that persuasion was possible and that different styles of persuasion (e.g., explicit, covert) were more effective depending on the decision context (e.g., political and dating). We conclude that it is important to educate people against trusting and following the advice of algorithms blindly. A discussion on who owns and can use the data that makes these algorithms work efficiently is also necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.