The Experts below are selected from a list of 15327 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Su Baykal - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
algorithmic mediation in group decisions fairness perceptions of algorithmically mediated vs discussion based social division
Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 2017Co-Authors: Min Kyung Lee, Su BaykalAbstract:How do individuals perceive algorithmic vs. group-made decisions? We investigated people's perceptions of mathematically-proven fair division algorithms making social division decisions. In our first qualitative study, about one third of the participants perceived algorithmic decisions as less than fair (30% for self, 36% for group), often because algorithmic assumptions about users did not account for multiple concepts of fairness or social behaviors, and the process of quantifying preferences through interfaces was prone to error. In our second experiment, algorithmic decisions were perceived to be less fair than discussion-based decisions, dependent on participants' Interpersonal Power and computer programming knowledge. Our work suggests that for algorithmic mediation to be fair, algorithms and their interfaces should account for social and altruistic behaviors that may be difficult to define in mathematical terms.
Min Kyung Lee - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
algorithmic mediation in group decisions fairness perceptions of algorithmically mediated vs discussion based social division
Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 2017Co-Authors: Min Kyung Lee, Su BaykalAbstract:How do individuals perceive algorithmic vs. group-made decisions? We investigated people's perceptions of mathematically-proven fair division algorithms making social division decisions. In our first qualitative study, about one third of the participants perceived algorithmic decisions as less than fair (30% for self, 36% for group), often because algorithmic assumptions about users did not account for multiple concepts of fairness or social behaviors, and the process of quantifying preferences through interfaces was prone to error. In our second experiment, algorithmic decisions were perceived to be less fair than discussion-based decisions, dependent on participants' Interpersonal Power and computer programming knowledge. Our work suggests that for algorithmic mediation to be fair, algorithms and their interfaces should account for social and altruistic behaviors that may be difficult to define in mathematical terms.
Marianne Schmid Mast - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Interpersonal behaviour and social perception in a hierarchy the Interpersonal Power and behaviour model
European Review of Social Psychology, 2010Co-Authors: Marianne Schmid MastAbstract:Power is a core dimension of social interactions and relationships. The present article addresses how Power hierarchies form, how Power is expressed and perceived via verbal and nonverbal behaviour during social interactions, and whether Power of others can accurately be assessed. Taking into account the inherently relational and interactional nature of the Power concept, an Interpersonal Power and behaviour model is presented. The model explicitly differentiates between different facets of Power (status, position Power, personality dominance, competence, experienced Power, and perceived Power) and it is suggested that these facets can moderate the Power–behaviour link. Research evidence is provided to illustrate the importance of a refined view of the concept of Power and of integrating the different Power facets in theorizing about Power.
Antonio Pierro - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
social dominance and Interpersonal Power asymmetrical relationships within hierarchy enhancing and hierarchy attenuating work environments
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2018Co-Authors: Antonio Aiello, Alessio Tesi, Felicia Pratto, Antonio PierroAbstract:We studied whether high-social dominant employees sustain hierarchies in different hierarchy-enhancing and hierarchy-attenuating organizations endorsing harsh and soft Power tactics. We found that social dominance orientation was positively associated with harsh Power tactics, and negatively associated with soft Power tactics. Employees higher in social dominance orientation endorsed harsh and opposed to soft Power tactics as respectively hierarchy-enhancing and hierarchy-attenuating legitimizing myths that promote a dominant-submissive form of intergroup relationships. We also found that supervisors higher in social dominance, due to their dominant position, strongly opposed soft Power tactics more than subordinates did. Amongst high-social dominant employees in the hierarchy-attenuating (vs. hierarchy-enhancing) organization, we observed the strongest opposition to soft Power tactics, which are the tactics most shared in an organization which tends to attenuate hierarchies.
Sharon Shavitt - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the impact of Power on information processing depends on cultural orientation
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2011Co-Authors: Carlos J Torelli, Sharon ShavittAbstract:Two studies show that different culturally based concepts of Interpersonal Power have distinct implications for information processing. People with a vertical individualist (VI) cultural orientation view Power in personalized terms (Power is for gaining status over and recognition by others), whereas people with a horizontal collectivist (HC) cultural orientation view Power in socialized terms (Power is for benefitting and helping others). The distinct goals associated with these Power concepts are served by different mindsets, such as stereotyping others versus learning the individuating needs of others. Therefore, for high-VI individuals, making personalized Power salient increases stereotyping in processing product information. That is, they recognize better information that is congruent with their prior product expectations, relative to their recognition of incongruent information. In contrast, for high-HC people, making socialized Power salient increases individuating processes, characterized by better memory for incongruent information.
