Do We Use Relatively Bad (Algorithmic) Advice? The Effects of Performance Feedback and Advice Representation on Advice Usage

Abstract

ABSTRACT Algorithms are capable of advising human decision‐makers in an increasing number of management accounting tasks such as business forecasts. Due to expected potential of these (intelligent) algorithms, there are growing research efforts to explore ways how to boost algorithmic advice usage in forecasting tasks. However, algorithmic advice can also be erroneous. Yet, the risk of using relatively bad advice is largely ignored in this research stream. Therefore, we conduct two online experiments to examine this risk of using relatively bad advice in a forecasting task. In Experiment 1, we examine the influence of performance feedback (revealing previous relative advice quality) and source of advice on advice usage in business forecasts. The results indicate that the provision of performance feedback increases subsequent advice usage but also the usage of subsequent relatively bad advice. In Experiment 2, we investigate whether advice representation, that is, displaying forecast intervals instead of a point estimate, helps to calibrate advice usage towards relative advice quality. The results suggest that advice representation might be a potential countermeasure to the usage of relatively bad advice. However, the effect of this antidote weakens when forecast intervals become less informative.

Related Papers

• → How numeric advice precision affects advice taking(2020)19 cited
• Susquehanna Chorale Spring Concert "Roots and Wings"(2017)
• → DETERMINING QUALITY REQUIREMENTS AT THE UNIVERSITIES TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION(2018)
• → ИСПОЛЬЗОВAНИЕ ПОТЕНЦИAЛA СОЦИAЛЬНЫХ ПAРТНЕРОВ В ПОДГОТОВКЕ БУДУЩИХ ПЕДAГОГОВ(2024)
• → A consistency account of advice taking: Integrating the effects of advice consensus and advice distance(2020)