How was my performance? Exploring the role of anchoring bias in AI-assisted decision making

Organizations leverage artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze data and support decision making. However, the integration of AI into organizational workflows may introduce unintended biases. Despite the proliferation of AI in organizations, no study to date has juxtaposed the impact of human and AI recommendations on decision making. Using two controlled experiments of 775 managers, we explore the impact of AI and cognitive bias on performance appraisal ratings. In particular, we examine anchoring and adjustment bias and present an effective strategy for mitigating this bias. The findings show managers’ performance ratings are impacted by the presence of an AI recommendation. The source of the recommendation (human or AI) interacted with the anchor (high or low) to influence managers’ rating. In particular, a high-anchor produced different performance ratings for each source. However, when exposed to a low-anchor, supervisors did not produce varied estimates from AI and non-AI recommendations. These findings suggest managers should be aware of the differential effects of anchoring and adjustment bias on organizational decisions. An employee’s performance may be rated differently, not because of the employee’s behavior, but because of the source of the recommendation and the magnitude of the anchor. This paper makes several significant contributions: (1) it is among the first studies to empirically test the presence and salience of anchoring bias in AI-assisted decision making; (2) it presents the consider-the-opposite strategy as an approach to effectively debias the anchoring effects of AI recommendations. • Using two experiments, we explore AI and cognitive bias in performance appraisal ratings. • The source of the recommendation (human or AI) interacts with the anchor. • Managers should be aware of the differential effects of anchoring and adjustment bias. • The consider-the-opposite strategy is an approach to effectively debias the anchoring effects.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Information Management
Published
2025-02-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2025.102875
Citations
17
Primary Topic
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
38.61
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How was my performance? Exploring the role of anchoring bias in AI-assisted decision making

Lemuria Carter, Dapeng Liu
17 citations
International Journal of Information Management
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
38.61
article

How was my performance? Exploring the role of anchoring bias in AI-assisted decision making

Lemuria Carter, Dapeng Liu
article en
17 citations

Abstract

Organizations leverage artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze data and support decision making. However, the integration of AI into organizational workflows may introduce unintended biases. Despite the proliferation of AI in organizations, no study to date has juxtaposed the impact of human and AI recommendations on decision making. Using two controlled experiments of 775 managers, we explore the impact of AI and cognitive bias on performance appraisal ratings. In particular, we examine anchoring and adjustment bias and present an effective strategy for mitigating this bias. The findings show managers’ performance ratings are impacted by the presence of an AI recommendation. The source of the recommendation (human or AI) interacted with the anchor (high or low) to influence managers’ rating. In particular, a high-anchor produced different performance ratings for each source. However, when exposed to a low-anchor, supervisors did not produce varied estimates from AI and non-AI recommendations. These findings suggest managers should be aware of the differential effects of anchoring and adjustment bias on organizational decisions. An employee’s performance may be rated differently, not because of the employee’s behavior, but because of the source of the recommendation and the magnitude of the anchor. This paper makes several significant contributions: (1) it is among the first studies to empirically test the presence and salience of anchoring bias in AI-assisted decision making; (2) it presents the consider-the-opposite strategy as an approach to effectively debias the anchoring effects of AI recommendations. • Using two experiments, we explore AI and cognitive bias in performance appraisal ratings. • The source of the recommendation (human or AI) interacts with the anchor. • Managers should be aware of the differential effects of anchoring and adjustment bias. • The consider-the-opposite strategy is an approach to effectively debias the anchoring effects.

International Journal of Information ManagementVol. 82
The University of Sydney (AU), Baylor University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
38.61
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.