Influence of believed AI involvement on the perception of digital medical advice.
Published version
Peer-reviewed
Repository URI
Repository DOI
Type
Change log
Authors
Abstract
Large language models offer novel opportunities to seek digital medical advice. While previous research primarily addressed the performance of such artificial intelligence (AI)-based tools, public perception of these advancements received little attention. In two preregistered studies (n = 2,280), we presented participants with scenarios of patients obtaining medical advice. All participants received identical information, but we manipulated the putative source of this advice ('AI', 'human physician', 'human + AI'). 'AI'- and 'human + AI'-labeled advice was evaluated as significantly less reliable and less empathetic compared with 'human'-labeled advice. Moreover, participants indicated lower willingness to follow the advice when AI was believed to be involved in advice generation. Our findings point toward an anti-AI bias when receiving digital medical advice, even when AI is supposedly supervised by physicians. Given the tremendous potential of AI for medicine, elucidating ways to counteract this bias should be an important objective of future research.
Description
Acknowledgements: We thank V. Mocke for helpful comments on the study design. This work was supported by the Faculty of Humanities of the University of Würzburg. M.R. is supported by a PhD scholarship from the German Academic Scholarship Foundation. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the paper.
Funder: Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes (German National Academic Foundation); doi: https://doi.org/10.13039/501100004350
Funder: Faculty of Humanities of the University of Wuerzburg
Funder: Pfizer Pharma GmbH
Keywords
Journal Title
Conference Name
Journal ISSN
1546-170X