IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/popmgt/v31y2022i9p3419-3434.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The risk of algorithm transparency: How algorithm complexity drives the effects on the use of advice

Author

Listed:
  • Cedric A. Lehmann
  • Christiane B. Haubitz
  • Andreas Fügener
  • Ulrich W. Thonemann

Abstract

Although algorithmic decision support is omnipresent in many managerial tasks, a lack of algorithm transparency is often stated as a barrier to successful human–machine collaboration. In this paper, we analyze the effects of algorithm transparency on the use of advice from algorithms with different degrees of complexity. We conduct a set of laboratory experiments in which participants receive identical advice from algorithms with different levels of transparency and complexity. Our results indicate that not the algorithm itself, but the individually perceived appropriateness of algorithmic complexity moderates the effects of transparency on the use of advice. We summarize this effect as a plateau curve: While perceiving an algorithm as too simple severely harms the use of its advice, the perception of an algorithm as being too complex has no significant effect. Our insights suggest that managers do not have to be concerned about revealing algorithms that are perceived to be appropriately complex or too complex to decision‐makers, even if the decision‐makers do not fully comprehend them. However, providing transparency on algorithms that are perceived to be simpler than appropriate could disappoint people's expectations and thereby reduce the use of their advice.

Suggested Citation

  • Cedric A. Lehmann & Christiane B. Haubitz & Andreas Fügener & Ulrich W. Thonemann, 2022. "The risk of algorithm transparency: How algorithm complexity drives the effects on the use of advice," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(9), pages 3419-3434, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:popmgt:v:31:y:2022:i:9:p:3419-3434
    DOI: 10.1111/poms.13770
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13770
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/poms.13770?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mirko Kremer & Brent Moritz & Enno Siemsen, 2011. "Demand Forecasting Behavior: System Neglect and Change Detection," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(10), pages 1827-1843, October.
    2. Jongbin Jung & Connor Concannon & Ravi Shroff & Sharad Goel & Daniel G. Goldstein, 2020. "Simple rules to guide expert classifications," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(3), pages 771-800, June.
    3. Fischer, Ilan & Harvey, Nigel, 1999. "Combining forecasts: What information do judges need to outperform the simple average?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 227-246, July.
    4. Harvey, Nigel & Bolger, Fergus, 1996. "Graphs versus tables: Effects of data presentation format on judgemental forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 119-137, March.
    5. Perera, H. Niles & Hurley, Jason & Fahimnia, Behnam & Reisi, Mohsen, 2019. "The human factor in supply chain forecasting: A systematic review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 574-600.
    6. Gino, Francesca, 2008. "Do we listen to advice just because we paid for it? The impact of advice cost on its use," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 234-245, November.
    7. George B. Dantzig, 1957. "Discrete-Variable Extremum Problems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 266-288, April.
    8. Webby, Richard & O'Connor, Marcus, 1996. "Judgemental and statistical time series forecasting: a review of the literature," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 91-118, March.
    9. Arvan, Meysam & Fahimnia, Behnam & Reisi, Mohsen & Siemsen, Enno, 2019. "Integrating human judgement into quantitative forecasting methods: A review," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 237-252.
    10. Goodwin, Paul & Sinan Gönül, M. & Önkal, Dilek, 2013. "Antecedents and effects of trust in forecasting advice," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 354-366.
    11. Andrew Prahl & Lyn Van Swol, 2017. "Understanding algorithm aversion: When is advice from automation discounted?," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(6), pages 691-702, September.
    12. Lawrence, Michael & Goodwin, Paul & O'Connor, Marcus & Onkal, Dilek, 2006. "Judgmental forecasting: A review of progress over the last 25 years," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 493-518.
    13. Fildes, Robert & Goodwin, Paul & Önkal, Dilek, 2019. "Use and misuse of information in supply chain forecasting of promotion effects," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 144-156.
    14. De Baets, Shari & Harvey, Nigel, 2020. "Using judgment to select and adjust forecasts from statistical models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(3), pages 882-895.
    15. Khosrowabadi, Naghmeh & Hoberg, Kai & Imdahl, Christina, 2022. "Evaluating human behaviour in response to AI recommendations for judgemental forecasting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(3), pages 1151-1167.
    16. Robert Fildes & Fotios Petropoulos, 2015. "Improving Forecast Quality in Practice," Foresight: The International Journal of Applied Forecasting, International Institute of Forecasters, issue 36, pages 5-12, Winter.
    17. Fildes, Robert, 2006. "The forecasting journals and their contribution to forecasting research: Citation analysis and expert opinion," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 415-432.
    18. Fildes, Robert & Goodwin, Paul & Lawrence, Michael & Nikolopoulos, Konstantinos, 2009. "Effective forecasting and judgmental adjustments: an empirical evaluation and strategies for improvement in supply-chain planning," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 3-23.
    19. Robert Fildes & Paul Goodwin, 2007. "Against Your Better Judgment? How Organizations Can Improve Their Use of Management Judgment in Forecasting," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 37(6), pages 570-576, December.
    20. Bonaccio, Silvia & Dalal, Reeshad S., 2006. "Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 127-151, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mathieu Chevrier & Brice Corgnet & Eric Guerci & Julie Rosaz, 2024. "Algorithm Credulity: Human and Algorithmic Advice in Prediction Experiments," GREDEG Working Papers 2024-03, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    2. Kosgoda, Dilina & Perera, H. Niles & Aloysius, John, 2024. "Effective goal framing for managers using inventory management systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 316(1), pages 138-151.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christiane B. Haubitz & Cedric A. Lehmann & Andreas Fügener & Ulrich W. Thonemann, 2021. "The Risk of Algorithm Transparency: How Algorithm Complexity Drives the Effects on Use of Advice," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 078, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    2. Petropoulos, Fotios & Apiletti, Daniele & Assimakopoulos, Vassilios & Babai, Mohamed Zied & Barrow, Devon K. & Ben Taieb, Souhaib & Bergmeir, Christoph & Bessa, Ricardo J. & Bijak, Jakub & Boylan, Joh, 2022. "Forecasting: theory and practice," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 705-871.
      • Fotios Petropoulos & Daniele Apiletti & Vassilios Assimakopoulos & Mohamed Zied Babai & Devon K. Barrow & Souhaib Ben Taieb & Christoph Bergmeir & Ricardo J. Bessa & Jakub Bijak & John E. Boylan & Jet, 2020. "Forecasting: theory and practice," Papers 2012.03854, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    3. Khosrowabadi, Naghmeh & Hoberg, Kai & Imdahl, Christina, 2022. "Evaluating human behaviour in response to AI recommendations for judgemental forecasting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(3), pages 1151-1167.
    4. Perera, H. Niles & Hurley, Jason & Fahimnia, Behnam & Reisi, Mohsen, 2019. "The human factor in supply chain forecasting: A systematic review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 574-600.
    5. De Baets, Shari & Harvey, Nigel, 2020. "Using judgment to select and adjust forecasts from statistical models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(3), pages 882-895.
    6. Hewage, Harsha Chamara & Perera, H. Niles & De Baets, Shari, 2022. "Forecast adjustments during post-promotional periods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(2), pages 461-472.
    7. Sroginis, Anna & Fildes, Robert & Kourentzes, Nikolaos, 2023. "Use of contextual and model-based information in adjusting promotional forecasts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(3), pages 1177-1191.
    8. Leitner, Johannes & Leopold-Wildburger, Ulrike, 2011. "Experiments on forecasting behavior with several sources of information - A review of the literature," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(3), pages 459-469, September.
    9. Arvan, Meysam & Fahimnia, Behnam & Reisi, Mohsen & Siemsen, Enno, 2019. "Integrating human judgement into quantitative forecasting methods: A review," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 237-252.
    10. Katsagounos, Ilias & Thomakos, Dimitrios D. & Litsiou, Konstantia & Nikolopoulos, Konstantinos, 2021. "Superforecasting reality check: Evidence from a small pool of experts and expedited identification," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 289(1), pages 107-117.
    11. Fildes, Robert & Goodwin, Paul, 2021. "Stability in the inefficient use of forecasting systems: A case study in a supply chain company," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 1031-1046.
    12. Alvarado-Valencia, Jorge & Barrero, Lope H. & Önkal, Dilek & Dennerlein, Jack T., 2017. "Expertise, credibility of system forecasts and integration methods in judgmental demand forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 298-313.
    13. Petropoulos, Fotios & Fildes, Robert & Goodwin, Paul, 2016. "Do ‘big losses’ in judgmental adjustments to statistical forecasts affect experts’ behaviour?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 842-852.
    14. Abolghasemi, Mahdi & Hurley, Jason & Eshragh, Ali & Fahimnia, Behnam, 2020. "Demand forecasting in the presence of systematic events: Cases in capturing sales promotions," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    15. Eksoz, Can & Mansouri, S. Afshin & Bourlakis, Michael & Önkal, Dilek, 2019. "Judgmental adjustments through supply integration for strategic partnerships in food chains," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 20-33.
    16. Petropoulos, Fotios & Goodwin, Paul & Fildes, Robert, 2017. "Using a rolling training approach to improve judgmental extrapolations elicited from forecasters with technical knowledge," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 314-324.
    17. Baecke, Philippe & De Baets, Shari & Vanderheyden, Karlien, 2017. "Investigating the added value of integrating human judgement into statistical demand forecasting systems," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 85-96.
    18. Fildes, Robert & Goodwin, Paul & Onkal, Dilek, 2015. "Information use in supply chain forecasting," MPRA Paper 66034, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Mirko Kremer & Enno Siemsen & Douglas J. Thomas, 2016. "The Sum and Its Parts: Judgmental Hierarchical Forecasting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(9), pages 2745-2764, September.
    20. De Baets, Shari & Harvey, Nigel, 2018. "Forecasting from time series subject to sporadic perturbations: Effectiveness of different types of forecasting support," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 163-180.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:popmgt:v:31:y:2022:i:9:p:3419-3434. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1937-5956 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.