[Finland] Moral psychological exploration of the asymmetry effect in AI-assisted euthanasia decisions

[Finland] Moral psychological exploration of the asymmetry effect in AI-assisted euthanasia decisions
Cognition; by Michael Laakasuo, Anton Kunnari, Kathryn Francis, Michaela Jirout Košová, Robin Kopecký, Paolo Buttazzoni, Mika Koverola, Jussi Palomäki, Marianna Drosinou, Ivar Hannikainen; 9/25
A recurring discrepancy in attitudes toward decisions made by human versus artificial agents, termed the Human-Robot moral judgment asymmetry, has been documented in moral psychology of AI. Our studies documented reduced approval of an AI doctor's decision to withdraw life support relative to a human doctor. This effect persisted regardless of whether the AI assumed a recommender role or made the final medical decision, but, importantly, disappeared under two conditions: when doctors kept on rather than withdraw life support, and when they carried out active euthanasia (e.g., providing a lethal injection or removing a respirator on the patient's demand) rather than passive euthanasia. These findings highlight two contextual factors–the level of automation and the patient's autonomy–that influence the presence of the asymmetry effect, neither of which is not predicted by existing theories. Finally, we found that the asymmetry effect was partly explained by perceptions of AI incompetence and limited explainability. As the role of AI in medicine continues to expand, our findings help to outline the conditions under which stakeholders disfavor AI over human doctors in clinical settings.
Publisher's note: I find this study simultaneously interesting and unsettling...