Existing research on human-AI collaborative decision-making focuses mainly on the interaction between AI and individual decision-makers. There is a limited understanding of how AI may perform in group decision-making. This paper presents a wizard-of-oz study in which two participants and an AI form a committee to rank three English essays. One novelty of our study is that we adopt a speculative design by endowing AI equal power to humans in group decision-making.We enable the AI to discuss and vote equally with other human members. We find that although the voice of AI is considered valuable, AI still plays a secondary role in the group because it cannot fully follow the dynamics of the discussion and make progressive contributions. Moreover, the divergent opinions of our participants regarding an "equal AI" shed light on the possible future of human-AI relations.
翻译:关于人类-大赦国际合作决策的现有研究主要侧重于大赦国际与个别决策者之间的互动,对大赦国际如何在团体决策中发挥作用的理解有限,本文介绍了一项“有魔力的”研究,其中两名参与者和大赦国际组成了一个委员会,对三份英文论文进行排位。我们研究的新颖之处之一是,我们通过赋予人类在团体决策中的同等权力来采用投机性设计。我们使大赦国际能够与其他人类成员平等地讨论和投票。我们发现,尽管大赦国际的声音被认为是有价值的,但大赦国际在团体中仍然扮演次要角色,因为它不能完全跟踪讨论的动态,并且作出渐进的贡献。此外,我们的与会者对“平等大赦国际”的不同意见揭示了人类-大赦国际关系可能的未来。