arXiv subjects

Lijia Wei

Publications and source records attributed to Lijia Wei.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2025

When Medical AI Explanations Help and When They Harm

We document a fundamental paradox in AI transparency: explanations improve decisions when algorithms are correct but systematically worsen them when algorithms err. In an experiment with 257 medical students making 3,855 diagnostic decisions, we find explanations increase accuracy by 6.3 percentage points when AI is correct (73% of cases) but decrease it by 4.9 points when incorrect (27% of cases). This asymmetry arises because modern AI systems generate equally persuasive explanations regardless of recommendation quality-physicians cannot distinguish helpful from misleading guidance. We show physicians treat explained AI as 15.2 percentage points more accurate than reality, with over-reliance persisting even for erroneous recommendations. Competent physicians with appropriate uncertainty suffer most from the AI transparency paradox (-12.4pp when AI errs), while overconfident novices benefit most (+9.9pp net). Welfare analysis reveals that selective transparency generates \$2.59 billion in annual healthcare value, 43% more than the \$1.82 billion from mandated universal transparency.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2025

Donald Trumps in the Virtual Polls: Simulating and Predicting Public Opinions in Surveys Using Large Language Models

In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have attracted attention due to their ability to generate human-like text. As surveys and opinion polls remain key tools for gauging public attitudes, there is increasing interest in assessing whether LLMs can accurately replicate human responses. This study examines the potential of LLMs, specifically ChatGPT-4o, to replicate human responses in large-scale surveys and to predict election outcomes based on demographic data. Employing data from the World Values Survey (WVS) and the American National Election Studies (ANES), we assess the LLM's performance in two key tasks: simulating human responses and forecasting U.S. election results. In simulations, the LLM was tasked with generating synthetic responses for various socio-cultural and trust-related questions, demonstrating notable alignment with human response patterns across U.S.-China samples, though with some limitations on value-sensitive topics. In prediction tasks, the LLM was used to simulate voting behavior in past U.S. elections and predict the 2024 election outcome. Our findings show that the LLM replicates cultural differences effectively, exhibits in-sample predictive validity, and provides plausible out-of-sample forecasts, suggesting potential as a cost-effective supplement for survey-based research.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2024

Overcoming Medical Overuse with AI Assistance: An Experimental Investigation

This study evaluates the effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in mitigating medical overtreatment, a significant issue characterized by unnecessary interventions that inflate healthcare costs and pose risks to patients. We conducted a lab-in-the-field experiment at a medical school, utilizing a novel medical prescription task, manipulating monetary incentives and the availability of AI assistance among medical students using a three-by-two factorial design. We tested three incentive schemes: Flat (constant pay regardless of treatment quantity), Progressive (pay increases with the number of treatments), and Regressive (penalties for overtreatment) to assess their influence on the adoption and effectiveness of AI assistance. Our findings demonstrate that AI significantly reduced overtreatment rates by up to 62% in the Regressive incentive conditions where (prospective) physician and patient interests were most aligned. Diagnostic accuracy improved by 17% to 37%, depending on the incentive scheme. Adoption of AI advice was high, with approximately half of the participants modifying their decisions based on AI input across all settings. For policy implications, we quantified the monetary (57%) and non-monetary (43%) incentives of overtreatment and highlighted AI's potential to mitigate non-monetary incentives and enhance social welfare. Our results provide valuable insights for healthcare administrators considering AI integration into healthcare systems.

econ.GN↗