IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v164y2021icp11-26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Humans judge, algorithms nudge: The psychology of behavior tracking acceptance

Author

Listed:
  • Raveendhran, Roshni
  • Fast, Nathanael J.

Abstract

This article examines employees’ acceptance of behavior tracking in the workplace. We theorize that people more willingly accept behavior tracking when it is conducted solely by technology (i.e., computer algorithms) rather than by humans. We posit that this is driven by the expectation that human-free tracking feels less judgmental and will, therefore, allow for a greater subjective sense of autonomy. The results of five experiments supported these predictions, revealing that participants were more likely to accept technology-operated than human-operated tracking (Experiments 1–5), an effect driven by reduced concerns about potential negative judgment, which, in turn, increased subjective sense of autonomy (Experiment 2). The stated purpose for tracking (Experiment 3), relation to the human tracker (Experiment 4), and type of behaviors tracked (Experiment 5) did not eliminate the effect. Technology-operated tracking also led to higher anticipation of intrinsic motivation (Experiments 3–4). Implications for research on the future of work are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Raveendhran, Roshni & Fast, Nathanael J., 2021. "Humans judge, algorithms nudge: The psychology of behavior tracking acceptance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 11-26.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:164:y:2021:i:c:p:11-26
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2021.01.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597821000078
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2021.01.001?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grant, Adam M. & Nurmohamed, Samir & Ashford, Susan J. & Dekas, Kathryn, 2011. "The performance implications of ambivalent initiative: The interplay of autonomous and controlled motivations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 241-251.
    2. Newman, David T. & Fast, Nathanael J. & Harmon, Derek J., 2020. "When eliminating bias isn’t fair: Algorithmic reductionism and procedural justice in human resource decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 149-167.
    3. Michel Anteby & Curtis K. Chan, 2018. "A Self-Fulfilling Cycle of Coercive Surveillance: Workers’ Invisibility Practices and Managerial Justification," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 247-263, April.
    4. Van Boven, Leaf & Loewenstein, George & Dunning, David, 2005. "The illusion of courage in social predictions: Underestimating the impact of fear of embarrassment on other people," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 130-141, March.
    5. Alessandro Acquisti & Leslie K. John & George Loewenstein, 2013. "What Is Privacy Worth?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(2), pages 249-274.
    6. Shalley, Christina E. & Perry-Smith, Jill E., 2001. "Effects of Social-Psychological Factors on Creative Performance: The Role of Informational and Controlling Expected Evaluation and Modeling Experience," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 1-22, January.
    7. Lamar Pierce & Daniel C. Snow & Andrew McAfee, 2015. "Cleaning House: The Impact of Information Technology Monitoring on Employee Theft and Productivity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(10), pages 2299-2319, October.
    8. DeVoe, Sanford E. & Iyengar, Sheena S., 2004. "Managers' theories of subordinates: A cross-cultural examination of manager perceptions of motivation and appraisal of performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 47-61, January.
    9. Bradley R. Staats & Hengchen Dai & David Hofmann & Katherine L. Milkman, 2017. "Motivating Process Compliance Through Individual Electronic Monitoring: An Empirical Examination of Hand Hygiene in Healthcare," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1563-1585, May.
    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. Hermann, Erik & Puntoni, Stefano, 2024. "Artificial intelligence and consumer behavior: From predictive to generative AI," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    2. Brice Corgnet, 2023. "An Experimental Test of Algorithmic Dismissals," Working Papers 2302, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    3. Corgnet, Brice & Hernán-González, Roberto & Mateo, Ricardo, 2023. "Peer effects in an automated world," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    4. Lieberman, Alicea & Schroeder, Juliana & Amir, On, 2022. "A voice inside my head: The psychological and behavioral consequences of auditory technologies," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    5. Feiqiang Fu & Wenhui Zha & Qiwei Zhou, 2023. "The Impact of Enterprise Digital Capability on Employee Sustainable Performance: From the Perspective of Employee Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-22, August.
    6. Anicich, Eric M., 2022. "Flexing and floundering in the on-demand economy: Narrative identity construction under algorithmic management," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).

    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. Jensen, Nathan & Lyons, Elizabeth & Chebelyon, Eddy & Bras, Ronan Le & Gomes, Carla, 2020. "Conspicuous monitoring and remote work," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 489-511.
    2. Müller, Stephan & Rau, Holger A., 2021. "Economic preferences and compliance in the social stress test of the COVID-19 crisis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    3. Kanfer, Ruth & Chen, Gilad, 2016. "Motivation in organizational behavior: History, advances and prospects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 6-19.
    4. Holger Herz & Christian Zihlmann, 2024. "Adverse effects of control? Evidence from a field experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(2), pages 469-488, April.
    5. Hummy Song & Anita L. Tucker & Karen L. Murrell & David R. Vinsonc, 2018. "Closing the Productivity Gap: Improving Worker Productivity Through Public Relative Performance Feedback and Validation of Best Practices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(6), pages 2628-2649, June.
    6. Jorge Padilla, 2020. "Big Tech “banks”, financial stability and regulation," Revista de Estabilidad Financiera, Banco de España, issue Spring.
    7. Nault, Kelly A. & Sezer, Ovul & Klein, Nadav, 2023. "It’s the journey, not just the destination: Conveying interpersonal warmth in written introductions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    8. Siliang Tong & Nan Jia & Xueming Luo & Zheng Fang, 2021. "The Janus face of artificial intelligence feedback: Deployment versus disclosure effects on employee performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(9), pages 1600-1631, September.
    9. Gerards, Ruud & Welters, Ricardo, 2016. "Impact of financial pressure on unemployed job search, job find success and job quality," ROA Research Memorandum 008, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    10. Maria R. Ibanez & Michael W. Toffel, 2020. "How Scheduling Can Bias Quality Assessment: Evidence from Food-Safety Inspections," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2396-2416, June.
    11. Henning Hermes & Philipp Lergetporer & Frauke Peter & Simon Wiederhold, 2021. "Application Barriers and the Socioeconomic Gap in Child Care Enrollment," CESifo Working Paper Series 9282, CESifo.
    12. Burdin, Gabriel & Dughera, Stefano & Landini, Fabio & Belloc, Filippo, 2023. "Contested Transparency: Digital Monitoring Technologies and Worker Voice," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1340, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    13. Cecere, Grazia & Le Guel, Fabrice & Soulié, Nicolas, 2012. "Perceived Internet privacy concerns on social network in Europe," MPRA Paper 41437, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Otterbring, Tobias & Folwarczny, Michał, 2024. "Social validation, reciprocation, and sustainable orientation: Cultivating “clean†codes of conduct through social influence," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    15. Benedict G. C. Dellaert & Suzanne B. Shu & Theo A. Arentze & Tom Baker & Kristin Diehl & Bas Donkers & Nathanael J. Fast & Gerald Häubl & Heidi Johnson & Uma R. Karmarkar & Harmen Oppewal & Bernd H. S, 2020. "Consumer decisions with artificially intelligent voice assistants," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 335-347, December.
    16. Frank Ebbers & Jan Zibuschka & Christian Zimmermann & Oliver Hinz, 2021. "User preferences for privacy features in digital assistants," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(2), pages 411-426, June.
    17. Idris Adjerid & Alessandro Acquisti & George Loewenstein, 2019. "Choice Architecture, Framing, and Cascaded Privacy Choices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2267-2290, May.
    18. Pai, Jieun & DeVoe, Sanford E. & Pfeffer, Jeffrey, 2020. "How income and the economic evaluation of time affect who we socialize with outside of work," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 158-175.
    19. Maren Gierlich-Joas & Thomas Hess & Rahild Neuburger, 2020. "More self-organization, more control—or even both? Inverse transparency as a digital leadership concept," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(3), pages 921-947, November.
    20. Bitterly, T. Bradford & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2019. "The impression management benefits of humorous self-disclosures: How humor influences perceptions of veracity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 73-89.

    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:eee:jobhdp:v:164:y:2021:i:c:p:11-26. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    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.