Visual Anthropomorphism Shifts Evaluations of Gendered AI Managers

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.17919v1
• Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2026 00:30:33 GMT
• Title: Visual Anthropomorphism Shifts Evaluations of Gendered AI Managers
• Authors: Ruiqing Han, Hao Cui, Taha Yasseri,
• Abstract summary: This research examines whether competence cues can reduce gender bias in evaluations of AI managers.<n>We compare text-based descriptions of AI managers with visually generated AI faces created using a reverse-correlation paradigm.
• Score: 0.7430785314896758
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: This research examines whether competence cues can reduce gender bias in evaluations of AI managers and whether these effects depend on how the AI is represented. Across two preregistered experiments (N = 2,505), each employing a 2 x 2 x 3 design manipulating AI gender, competence, and decision outcome, we compared text-based descriptions of AI managers with visually generated AI faces created using a reverse-correlation paradigm. In the text condition, evaluations were driven by competence rather than gender. When participants received unfavourable decisions, high-competence AI managers were judged as fairer, more competent, and better leaders than low-competence managers, regardless of AI gender. In contrast, when the AI manager was visually represented, competence cues had attenuated influence once facial information was present. Instead, participants showed systematic gender-differentiated responses to AI faces, with feminine-appearing managers evaluated as more competent and more trustworthy than masculine-appearing managers, particularly when delivering favourable outcomes. These gender effects were largely absent when outcomes were unfavourable, suggesting that negative feedback attenuates the influence of both competence information and facial cues. Taken together, these findings show that competence information can mitigate negative reactions to AI managers in text-based interactions, whereas facial anthropomorphism elicits gendered perceptual biases not observed in text-only settings. The results highlight that representational modality plays a critical role in determining when gender stereotypes are activated in evaluations of AI systems and underscore that design choices are consequential for AI governance in evaluative contexts.

Related papers

• Bias in the Loop: How Humans Evaluate AI-Generated Suggestions [9.578382668831988]
  Human-AI collaboration increasingly drives decision-making across industries, from medical diagnosis to content moderation.<n>We know little about the psychological factors that determine when these collaborations succeed or fail.<n>We conducted a randomized experiment with 2,784 participants to examine how task design and individual characteristics shape human responses to AI-generated suggestions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-10T11:43:29Z)
• Fairness Is Not Enough: Auditing Competence and Intersectional Bias in AI-powered Resume Screening [0.0]
  This study investigates the question of competence through a two-part audit of eight major AI platforms.<n>Experiment 1 confirmed complex, contextual racial and gender biases, with some models penalizing candidates merely for the presence of demographic signals.<n>Experiment 2, which evaluated core competence, provided a critical insight: some models that appeared unbiased were, in fact, incapable of performing a substantive evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-11T16:57:13Z)
• Gender Bias in Perception of Human Managers Extends to AI Managers [2.5063318977668465]
  As AI becomes more embedded in workplaces, it is shifting from a tool for efficiency to an active force in organizational decision-making.<n>How AI managers are perceived in comparison to human managers and how gender influences these perceptions remains uncertain.<n>We conducted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) where teams of three participants worked together under a randomly assigned manager.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-24T23:52:05Z)
• Engaging with AI: How Interface Design Shapes Human-AI Collaboration in High-Stakes Decision-Making [8.948482790298645]
  We examine how various decision-support mechanisms impact user engagement, trust, and human-AI collaborative task performance.<n>Our findings reveal that mechanisms like AI confidence levels, text explanations, and performance visualizations enhanced human-AI collaborative task performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-28T02:03:00Z)
• Revealing and Reducing Gender Biases in Vision and Language Assistants (VLAs) [82.57490175399693]
  We study gender bias in 22 popular image-to-text vision-language assistants (VLAs)<n>Our results show that VLAs replicate human biases likely present in the data, such as real-world occupational imbalances.<n>To eliminate the gender bias in these models, we find that fine-tuning-based debiasing methods achieve the best trade-off between debiasing and retaining performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-25T05:59:44Z)
• How Performance Pressure Influences AI-Assisted Decision Making [52.997197698288936]
  We show how pressure and explainable AI (XAI) techniques interact with AI advice-taking behavior.<n>Our results show complex interaction effects, with different combinations of pressure and XAI techniques either improving or worsening AI advice taking behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T22:39:52Z)
• Beyond Binary Gender: Evaluating Gender-Inclusive Machine Translation with Ambiguous Attitude Words [85.48043537327258]
  Existing machine translation gender bias evaluations are primarily focused on male and female genders. This study presents a benchmark AmbGIMT (Gender-Inclusive Machine Translation with Ambiguous attitude words) We propose a novel process to evaluate gender bias based on the Emotional Attitude Score (EAS), which is used to quantify ambiguous attitude words.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-23T08:13:51Z)
• Beyond Recommender: An Exploratory Study of the Effects of Different AI Roles in AI-Assisted Decision Making [48.179458030691286]
  We examine three AI roles: Recommender, Analyzer, and Devil's Advocate. Our results show each role's distinct strengths and limitations in task performance, reliance appropriateness, and user experience. These insights offer valuable implications for designing AI assistants with adaptive functional roles according to different situations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-04T07:32:28Z)
• Fairness in AI and Its Long-Term Implications on Society [68.8204255655161]
  We take a closer look at AI fairness and analyze how lack of AI fairness can lead to deepening of biases over time. We discuss how biased models can lead to more negative real-world outcomes for certain groups. If the issues persist, they could be reinforced by interactions with other risks and have severe implications on society in the form of social unrest.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-16T11:22:59Z)
• How Different Groups Prioritize Ethical Values for Responsible AI [75.40051547428592]
  Private companies, public sector organizations, and academic groups have outlined ethical values they consider important for responsible AI technologies. While their recommendations converge on a set of central values, little is known about the values a more representative public would find important for the AI technologies they interact with and might be affected by. We conducted a survey examining how individuals perceive and prioritize responsible AI values across three groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-16T14:39:37Z)
• The Who in XAI: How AI Background Shapes Perceptions of AI Explanations [61.49776160925216]
  We conduct a mixed-methods study of how two different groups--people with and without AI background--perceive different types of AI explanations. We find that (1) both groups showed unwarranted faith in numbers for different reasons and (2) each group found value in different explanations beyond their intended design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-28T17:32:04Z)
• Responsible AI: Gender bias assessment in emotion recognition [6.833826997240138]
  This research work aims to study a gender bias in deep learning methods for facial expression recognition. More biased neural networks show bigger accuracy gap in emotion recognition between male and female test sets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-21T17:00:21Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.