How people choose between AI and human advisors and update their beliefs

What is it about?

In this work, we show how people first select between different advisors, humans or algorithms, when trying to make geopolitical forecasts, then how they update their beliefs. People show a strong preference for hybrid advisors, which combine the wisdom of both humans and algorithms, but then update similarly regardless of which they chose. Make the advice costly also makes them less likely to request advice, but more likely to use it when they do.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

This work is important for stakeholders who use forecasts to make decisions. It shows that the most important thing they can do is give forecasters helpful advice, regardless of the source, though if multiple sources are available, that people will choose the best of both worlds between humans and algorithms. Making advice costly can also make people use advice more judiciously.