As firms move towards data-driven decision-making using algorithmic systems, concerns are raised regarding the lack of transparency of these systems which could have ramifications related to users’ trust and the potential for provoking discriminatory decisions. Although previous research has developed methods to improve algorithmic transparency, little empirical evidence exists regarding the extent of the effectiveness of these approaches. Drawing upon Rest’s theory of ethical decision-making and the literature on algorithmic transparency and bias, we investigate the effectiveness of feature importance (FI), a common transparency-enhancing approach, which illustrates the nature and the weights of the features utilised by an algorithm. Through an online experiment employing a fictitious tool that provided recommendations for selecting employees for a promotion-related training programme, we find that FI is effective when biased recommendations include direct discrimination (i.e. when individuals are treated less favourably on protected grounds such as gender); but is of little assistance when discrimination is indirect (i.e. when a criterion or practice that is apparently neutral, disadvantages a group of individuals who are of a protected class). Additionally, we propose a new transparency approach, using aggregated demographic information, to accompany FI in indirect discrimination circumstances and report the results of testing its effects.

The fake news phenomenon has exposed the vulnerability of individuals and societies to information manipulation in social media. We conducted two studies to understand why people believe in fake news and propose a simple IT intervention method that can help in detecting disinformation. In Study 1, we designed a laboratory experiment using behavioral and neurophysiological tools to test two competing theories in the disinformation literature. Both behavioral and neurophysiological evidence support the classical reasoning account hypotheses and reject the motivated reasoning predictions, suggesting that the lack of actively open-minded thinking (AOT) is linked to the belief in fake news. An intervention method was designed (i.e., performance feedback) that reduces individuals’ overconfidence in their ability to detect fake news and encourages more analytical thinking. In Study 2, we conducted an online survey presenting participants with their performance feedback halfway through the survey. The results show that the intervention increased participants’ performance by 14%. Our study contributes to the research on fake news by providing behavioral and neurophysiological evidence in support of the classical reasoning account. It also offers a simple and practical method that increases users’ ability to detect fake news.

Although significantly more organizations have recently invested in Data Analytics (DA), most business users do not execute DA recommendations. Conceptualizing the novel concept of DA recommendation quality, shaped by tool, data and analyst quality, this study draws on the Stimulus-Organism-Response framework to investigate its effect on shaping users’ perceptions of concordance, actionability, and risk, ultimately influencing their DA recommendation execution. The theoretical model is empirically validated using a sample of senior managers across North America. Enriching DA literature, this study shows that DA recommendation quality is positively associated with recommendation execution, while actionability is the dominant factor in increasing it.