Human–Algorithmic Bias: Source, Evolution, and Impact

Prior work on human-algorithmic bias has seen difficulty in empirically identifying the underlying mechanisms of bias because in a typical “one-time” decision-making scenario, different mechanisms generate the same patterns of observable decisions. In this study, leveraging a unique repeat decision-making setting in a high-stakes microlending context, we aim to uncover the underlying source, evolution dynamics, and associated impacts of bias. We first develop a structural econometric model of the decision dynamics to understand the source and evolution of bias in human evaluators in microloan granting. We find that both preference-based and belief-based biases exist in human decisions and are in favor of female applicants. Our counterfactual simulations show that the elimination of either of the two biases improves the fairness in financial resource allocation as well as the platform profits. The profit improvement mainly stems from the increased approval probability for male borrowers, especially those who would eventually pay back loans. Furthermore, to examine how human biases evolve when being inherited by machine learning (ML) algorithms, we train state-of-the-art ML algorithms for default risk prediction on both real-world data sets with human biases encoded within and counterfactual data sets with human biases partially or fully removed. We find that even fairness-unaware ML algorithms can reduce bias in human decisions. Interestingly, although removing both types of human bias from the training data can further improve ML fairness, the fairness-enhancing effects vary significantly between new and repeat applicants. Based on our findings, we discuss how to reduce decision bias most effectively in a human-ML pipeline. This paper was accepted by D. J. Wu, Special Issue on the Human-Algorithm Connection. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.03862 .

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Management Science
Published
2025-09-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.03862
Citations
2
Primary Topic
FinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.57
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Human–Algorithmic Bias: Source, Evolution, and Impact

Yan Huang, Xiyang Hu, Tian Lu, Beibei Li
2 citations
Management Science
FinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
4.57
article

Human–Algorithmic Bias: Source, Evolution, and Impact

Yan Huang, Xiyang Hu, Tian Lu, Beibei Li
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Prior work on human-algorithmic bias has seen difficulty in empirically identifying the underlying mechanisms of bias because in a typical “one-time” decision-making scenario, different mechanisms generate the same patterns of observable decisions. In this study, leveraging a unique repeat decision-making setting in a high-stakes microlending context, we aim to uncover the underlying source, evolution dynamics, and associated impacts of bias. We first develop a structural econometric model of the decision dynamics to understand the source and evolution of bias in human evaluators in microloan granting. We find that both preference-based and belief-based biases exist in human decisions and are in favor of female applicants. Our counterfactual simulations show that the elimination of either of the two biases improves the fairness in financial resource allocation as well as the platform profits. The profit improvement mainly stems from the increased approval probability for male borrowers, especially those who would eventually pay back loans. Furthermore, to examine how human biases evolve when being inherited by machine learning (ML) algorithms, we train state-of-the-art ML algorithms for default risk prediction on both real-world data sets with human biases encoded within and counterfactual data sets with human biases partially or fully removed. We find that even fairness-unaware ML algorithms can reduce bias in human decisions. Interestingly, although removing both types of human bias from the training data can further improve ML fairness, the fairness-enhancing effects vary significantly between new and repeat applicants. Based on our findings, we discuss how to reduce decision bias most effectively in a human-ML pipeline. This paper was accepted by D. J. Wu, Special Issue on the Human-Algorithm Connection. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.03862 .

Management ScienceVol. 72(1)
Arizona State University (US), Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
FinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
4.57
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.