ArticleScientific reports2025
Exploring condition in which people accept AI over human judgements on justified defection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
Abstract
As artificial intelligence (AI) technology is introduced into different areas of society, understanding people's willingness to accept AI decisions emerges as a critical scientific and societal issue. It is an open question whether people can accept the judgement of humans or AI in situations where they are unsure of their judgement, as in the trolley problem. Here, we focus on justified defection (non-cooperation with a bad person) in indirect reciprocity because it has been shown that people avoid judging justified defection as good or bad. We explore which decisions people would accept when AI and humans make different decisions in the justified defection. Two experiments revealed that only when AI judged positively and a human judged negatively, people rated the AI's judgement as better. The research suggests that people's acceptance of AI decisions depends on estimating the hidden intentions behind societal norms. It offers new insights into human norm analysis by examining the differences in acceptance between AI and human judgments.
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.