Trusting machines with morality — Delegating moral decisions to AI

Research suggests that individuals are generally skeptical about the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in moral contexts, favoring human decision-makers over AI. Yet, in two experiments involving a total of 5639 participants, we find that individuals facing a real-life moral decision delegate significantly more often when they can delegate to AI rather than to a human counterpart. This result highlights AI’s relative appeal as a moral delegate, indicating that individuals’ preferences for AI’s involvement change when they themselves assume the role of a decision-maker. Responsibility shifting, previously studied as a motive for delegation to humans, extends to AI delegates. Moreover, it appears to be facilitated by individuals adapting their beliefs about AI’s capability in a self-serving manner. Ambiguity surrounding that capability allows them to interpret it in ways that justify delegation. These findings add nuance to assumptions about algorithm aversion in moral domains and raise critical questions about accountability and the ethical implications of relying on AI for morally sensitive decisions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Economic Review
Published
2026-01-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2025.105255
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Trusting machines with morality — Delegating moral decisions to AI

Nicola Hüholt, Nora Szech
European Economic Review
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Trusting machines with morality — Delegating moral decisions to AI

Nicola Hüholt, Nora Szech
article en

Abstract

Research suggests that individuals are generally skeptical about the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in moral contexts, favoring human decision-makers over AI. Yet, in two experiments involving a total of 5639 participants, we find that individuals facing a real-life moral decision delegate significantly more often when they can delegate to AI rather than to a human counterpart. This result highlights AI’s relative appeal as a moral delegate, indicating that individuals’ preferences for AI’s involvement change when they themselves assume the role of a decision-maker. Responsibility shifting, previously studied as a motive for delegation to humans, extends to AI delegates. Moreover, it appears to be facilitated by individuals adapting their beliefs about AI’s capability in a self-serving manner. Ambiguity surrounding that capability allows them to interpret it in ways that justify delegation. These findings add nuance to assumptions about algorithm aversion in moral domains and raise critical questions about accountability and the ethical implications of relying on AI for morally sensitive decisions.

European Economic ReviewVol. 184
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (DE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 94%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
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.

Trusting machines with morality — Delegating moral decisions to AI — Nicola Hüholt, Nora Szech · European Economic Review (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS