Can you smell what AI is advising? Human, machine, or both: A comparative experimental study on financial advice

The study tested if the source of financial advice (Human, AI or Human-AI Hybrid) impacted the outcome of a long-term financial portfolio using a quasi-experimental design with 93 participants. We objectively measured the financial outcomes. By grounding the study in social exchange theory and the Interpersonal Interdependence Framework, we explored the impact of dyadic encounter on trust and acceptance of advice. While every advisor type improved portfolio outcomes, the groups using AI and Hybrid models saw higher success rates compared to the human-only group. While the absolute trust level did not differ across groups, an interesting discovery was how that trust was built. We found that trust in AI isn't an immediate emotional response, but a psychological roadmap where interaction quality builds trust. Participants exhibited less trust towards human advisors compared to AI advisors, as trust is built upon reputation and personal attributes. Our results suggest that AI does not destroy trust, but shifts the reason of trust from personal rapport to process-based interaction. A hybrid model can be a good alternative that can maintain performance of AI while allowing for Human oversight. The future of the financial industry may not have to choose between human or machines. They could potentially utilize AI-based Frameworks by focusing on Calibrated trust.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Acta Psychologica
Published
2026-02-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.106530
Primary Topic
AI in Service Interactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can you smell what AI is advising? Human, machine, or both: A comparative experimental study on financial advice

Niyaz Panakaje, Ata Nikzad, S.M. Riha Parvin, Saurav Sathish Kumta
Acta Psychologica
AI in Service Interactions
article

Can you smell what AI is advising? Human, machine, or both: A comparative experimental study on financial advice

Niyaz Panakaje, Ata Nikzad, S.M. Riha Parvin, Saurav Sathish Kumta
article en

Abstract

The study tested if the source of financial advice (Human, AI or Human-AI Hybrid) impacted the outcome of a long-term financial portfolio using a quasi-experimental design with 93 participants. We objectively measured the financial outcomes. By grounding the study in social exchange theory and the Interpersonal Interdependence Framework, we explored the impact of dyadic encounter on trust and acceptance of advice. While every advisor type improved portfolio outcomes, the groups using AI and Hybrid models saw higher success rates compared to the human-only group. While the absolute trust level did not differ across groups, an interesting discovery was how that trust was built. We found that trust in AI isn't an immediate emotional response, but a psychological roadmap where interaction quality builds trust. Participants exhibited less trust towards human advisors compared to AI advisors, as trust is built upon reputation and personal attributes. Our results suggest that AI does not destroy trust, but shifts the reason of trust from personal rapport to process-based interaction. A hybrid model can be a good alternative that can maintain performance of AI while allowing for Human oversight. The future of the financial industry may not have to choose between human or machines. They could potentially utilize AI-based Frameworks by focusing on Calibrated trust.

Acta PsychologicaVol. 264
Yenepoya University (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 49%
AI in Service Interactions
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.