arXiv subjects

Andreas Ostermaier

Publications and source records attributed to Andreas Ostermaier.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2025

ChatGPT's advice drives moral judgments with or without justification

Why do users follow moral advice from chatbots? A chatbot is not an authoritative moral advisor, but it can generate seemingly plausible arguments. Users do not follow reasoned more readily than unreasoned advice, though, we find in an experiment. However, this is also true if we attribute advice to a moral advisor, not a chatbot. Hence, it seems that advice offers users a cheap way to escape from a moral dilemma. This is a concern that chatbots do not raise, but they exacerbate it as they make advice easily accessible. We conclude that it takes ethical in addition to digital literacy to harness users against moral advice from chatbots.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2023

The moral authority of ChatGPT

ChatGPT is not only fun to chat with, but it also searches information, answers questions, and gives advice. With consistent moral advice, it might improve the moral judgment and decisions of users, who often hold contradictory moral beliefs. Unfortunately, ChatGPT turns out highly inconsistent as a moral advisor. Nonetheless, it influences users' moral judgment, we find in an experiment, even if they know they are advised by a chatting bot, and they underestimate how much they are influenced. Thus, ChatGPT threatens to corrupt rather than improves users' judgment. These findings raise the question of how to ensure the responsible use of ChatGPT and similar AI. Transparency is often touted but seems ineffective. We propose training to improve digital literacy.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2022

Mandatory Disclosure of Standardized Sustainability Metrics: The Case of the EU Taxonomy Regulation

Sustainability reporting enables investors to make informed decisions and is hoped to facilitate the transition to a green economy. The European Union's taxonomy regulation enacts rules to discern sustainable activities and determine the resulting green revenue, whose disclosure is mandatory for many companies. In an experiment, we explore how this standardized metric is received by investors relative to a sustainability rating. We find that green revenue affects the investment probability more than the rating if the two metrics disagree. If they agree, a strong rating has an incremental effect on the investment probability. The effects are robust to variation in investors' attitudes. Our findings imply that a mandatory standardized sustainability metric is an effective means of channeling investment, which complements rather than substitutes sustainability ratings.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2021

Zombies in the Loop? Humans Trust Untrustworthy AI-Advisors for Ethical Decisions

Departing from the claim that AI needs to be trustworthy, we find that ethical advice from an AI-powered algorithm is trusted even when its users know nothing about its training data and when they learn information about it that warrants distrust. We conducted online experiments where the subjects took the role of decision-makers who received advice from an algorithm on how to deal with an ethical dilemma. We manipulated the information about the algorithm and studied its influence. Our findings suggest that AI is overtrusted rather than distrusted. We suggest digital literacy as a potential remedy to ensure the responsible use of AI.

cs.HC↗