A phenomenon of AI-conformity: how algorithms change human moral decision-making

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.00013v1
• Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 09:09:27 GMT
• Title: A phenomenon of AI-conformity: how algorithms change human moral decision-making
• Abstract summary: The present study examined whether AI judgements affect moral decision-making in humans.<n>The results suggest that even moral judgements, despite their sensitivity and personal significance, may be susceptible to algorithmic conformity.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Social conformity is a well-documented phenomenon in which individuals shift their opinions towards those of a social majority. As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly integrated into everyday life it may also create a novel source of influence giving rise to algorithmic conformity, mechanisms of which are poorly understood. The present study examined whether AI judgements affect moral decision-making in humans (n=165) adapting the classical Asch paradigm. Participants completed a series of moral dilemmas under three different conditions: in presence of social majority, with an AI model providing brief answers and with an AI model providing both answers and explanations of its choices. In all conditions the presented responses contradicted generally accepted moral norms. The results indicated that an AI model with a reasoning component affected the opinion of participants to a degree comparable to that of a human majority. These findings suggest that even moral judgements, despite their sensitivity and personal significance, may be susceptible to algorithmic conformity. However, the mechanism underlying algorithmic conformity appears to differ from the social one. Overall, the study challenges the assumption that moral decision-making lies in "AI inadmissibility zone" - a sphere that is considered as an area in which only human-made decisions are acceptable and highlights the need for a further investigation of this phenomenon as AI-based recommendations become increasingly embedded into human decision-making.

Related papers

• AI Use Conditions and Perspective Diversity in Ethical Decision-Making: A Pilot Study of Human Reasoning Processes [0.0]
  This pilot study explored whether different AI-use conditions were associated with differences in reasoning breadth during ethical decision-making.<n>Twenty-nine participants completed an ethical dilemma under one of three conditions.<n>Participants across conditions generally converged on similar ethical conclusions, most commonly favoring disclosure and customer protection.<n>Participants in the AI-Mandatory condition considered a broader range of perspectives, including legal, regulatory, organizational, technical, and ethical viewpoints.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-10T05:52:30Z)
• Psychological features of dispute content and public acceptance of AI in legal adjudication: evidence for systematic variation beyond individual differences [0.0]
  We examined whether psychological characteristics of dispute content shape acceptability judgments for algorithmic adjudication.<n>We found that experimentally manipulated contextual features - emotional involvement and prototypicality - modulated acceptability judgments.<n>These findings suggest that the psychological features of dispute content constitute an overlooked dimension in AI acceptance research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-06T09:10:43Z)
• Expected Moral Shortfall for Ethical Competence in Decision-making Models [2.2111747843735268]
  Moral cognition is a crucial yet underexplored aspect of decision-making in AI models.<n>This paper presents a comparative analysis of techniques to instill ethical competence into AI models.<n>A novel mathematical discretization of morality and a demonstration of its real-life application have been conveyed and tested against other techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-04T07:37:03Z)
• What Makes AI Applications Acceptable or Unacceptable? A Predictive Moral Framework [0.4666493857924357]
  We use a comprehensive taxonomy of 100 AI applications spanning personal and organizational contexts.<n>In participants' collective judgment, applications ranged from highly unacceptable to fully acceptable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-26T12:55:30Z)
• Aligning Generalisation Between Humans and Machines [74.120848518198]
  AI technology can support humans in scientific discovery and forming decisions, but may also disrupt democracies and target individuals.<n>The responsible use of AI and its participation in human-AI teams increasingly shows the need for AI alignment.<n>A crucial yet often overlooked aspect of these interactions is the different ways in which humans and machines generalise.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T18:36:07Z)
• 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)
• Modeling Moral Choices in Social Dilemmas with Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning [4.2050490361120465]
  A bottom-up learning approach may be more appropriate for studying and developing ethical behavior in AI agents. We present a systematic analysis of the choices made by intrinsically-motivated RL agents whose rewards are based on moral theories. We analyze the impact of different types of morality on the emergence of cooperation, defection or exploitation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-20T09:36:42Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)
• Metaethical Perspectives on 'Benchmarking' AI Ethics [81.65697003067841]
  Benchmarks are seen as the cornerstone for measuring technical progress in Artificial Intelligence (AI) research. An increasingly prominent research area in AI is ethics, which currently has no set of benchmarks nor commonly accepted way for measuring the 'ethicality' of an AI system. We argue that it makes more sense to talk about 'values' rather than 'ethics' when considering the possible actions of present and future AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-11T14:36:39Z)
• Effect of Confidence and Explanation on Accuracy and Trust Calibration in AI-Assisted Decision Making [53.62514158534574]
  We study whether features that reveal case-specific model information can calibrate trust and improve the joint performance of the human and AI. We show that confidence score can help calibrate people's trust in an AI model, but trust calibration alone is not sufficient to improve AI-assisted decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-07T15:33:48Z)
• Learning from Learning Machines: Optimisation, Rules, and Social Norms [91.3755431537592]
  It appears that the area of AI that is most analogous to the behaviour of economic entities is that of morally good decision-making. Recent successes of deep learning for AI suggest that more implicit specifications work better than explicit ones for solving such problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2019-12-29T17:42:06Z)

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.