01290nam a22001577a 4500999001900000008004100019100005500060245006000115260003200175300002800207520072900235773003100964906002700995942000701022952010301029  c515468d515468210129b           ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d  aCowgill, B., Dell’Acqua, F. and Matz, S. 923963  aThe managerial effects of algorithmic fairness activism  aAEA Papers and Proceedings   a110, May, 2020: p.85-90  aHow do ethical arguments affect AI adoption in business? We randomly expose business decision-makers to arguments used in AI fairness activism. Arguments emphasizing the inescapability of algorithmic bias lead managers to abandon AI for manual review by humans and report greater expectations about lawsuits and negative PR. These effects persist even when AI lowers gender and racial disparities and when engineering investments to address AI fairness are feasible. Emphasis on status quo comparisons yields opposite effects. We also measure the effects of "scientific veneer" in AI ethics arguments. Scientific veneer changes managerial behavior but does not asymmetrically benefit favorable (versus critical) AI activism.  aAEA Papers and Proceedings  aINFORMATION TECHNOLOGY  cAR  00102ddc40709389531aIIPAbIIPAd2021-01-29h110, May, 2020: p.85-90pAR123953r2021-01-29yAR