Blame games: Who is to blame when things go wrong, human or AI?

Understanding responses to AI versus human errors is crucial, as they shape trust, acceptance, and interaction outcomes. This study investigates the emotional dynamics of human-AI interactions by examining how agent identity (human vs. AI) and error severity (low vs. high) influence negative emotional reactions. Using a 2×2 factorial design with 250 participants, the findings reveal that human agents consistently elicit stronger negative emotions than AI agents, regardless of error severity. Moreover, perceived experience moderates this relationship under specific conditions: individuals who view AI less experienced than humans exhibit stronger negative emotions toward human errors, while this effect diminishes when AI is perceived as having higher experience. However, perceived agency does not significantly influence emotional responses. These findings highlight the critical role of agent identity and perceived experience in shaping emotional reactions to errors, providing new insights into the psychological dynamics of human-AI interactions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-04-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3706599.3719949
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.43
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Blame games: Who is to blame when things go wrong, human or AI?

Bu Zhong, Yin Qin, Wanhui April Zhou
1 citations
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
1.43
article

Blame games: Who is to blame when things go wrong, human or AI?

Bu Zhong, Yin Qin, Wanhui April Zhou
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Understanding responses to AI versus human errors is crucial, as they shape trust, acceptance, and interaction outcomes. This study investigates the emotional dynamics of human-AI interactions by examining how agent identity (human vs. AI) and error severity (low vs. high) influence negative emotional reactions. Using a 2×2 factorial design with 250 participants, the findings reveal that human agents consistently elicit stronger negative emotions than AI agents, regardless of error severity. Moreover, perceived experience moderates this relationship under specific conditions: individuals who view AI less experienced than humans exhibit stronger negative emotions toward human errors, while this effect diminishes when AI is perceived as having higher experience. However, perceived agency does not significantly influence emotional responses. These findings highlight the critical role of agent identity and perceived experience in shaping emotional reactions to errors, providing new insights into the psychological dynamics of human-AI interactions.

Hong Kong Baptist University (HK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
1.43
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.

Blame games: Who is to blame when things go wrong, human or AI? — Bu Zhong, Yin Qin, et al. · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS