# Does AI and Human Advice Mitigate Punishment for Selfish Behavior? An Experiment on AI ethics From a Psychological Perspective

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.19487 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.19487/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 68 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 26 May 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Artificial Intelligence: the global landscape of ethics guidelines](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.11668/) (2019)
- [Discrimination in the Age of Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.03731/) (2019)
- [Large Language Models are as persuasive as humans, but how? About the cognitive effort and moral-emotional language of LLM arguments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.09329/) (2024)
- [Human Perceptions on Moral Responsibility of AI: A Case Study in AI-Assisted Bail Decision-Making](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.00625/) (2021)
- [Corrupted by Algorithms? How AI-generated and Human-written Advice Shape (Dis)honesty](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.01954/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

People increasingly rely on AI-advice when making decisions. At times, such advice can promote selfish behavior. When individuals abide by selfishness-promoting AI advice, how are they perceived and punished? To study this question, we build on theories from social psychology and combine machine-behavior and behavioral economic approaches. In a pre-registered, financially-incentivized experiment, evaluators could punish real decision-makers who (i) received AI, human, or no advice. The advice (ii) encouraged selfish or prosocial behavior, and decision-makers (iii) behaved selfishly or, in a control condition, behaved prosocially. Evaluators further assigned responsibility to decision-makers and their advisors. Results revealed that (i) prosocial behavior was punished very little, whereas selfish behavior was punished much more. Focusing on selfish behavior, (ii) compared to receiving no advice, selfish behavior was penalized more harshly after prosocial advice and more leniently after selfish advice. Lastly, (iii) whereas selfish decision-makers were seen as more responsible when they followed AI compared to human advice, punishment between the two advice sources did not vary. Overall, behavior and advice content shape punishment, whereas the advice source does not.