Do patients prefer a human doctor, artificial intelligence, or a blend, and is this preference dependent on medical discipline? Empirical evidence and implications for medical practice

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Today the doctor-patient relationship typically takes place in a face-to-face setting. However, with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI) systems, two further interaction scenarios are possible: an AI system supports the doctor’s decision regarding diagnosis and/or treatment while interacting with the patient, or an AI system could even substitute the doctor and hence a patient interacts with a chatbot (i.e., a machine) alone. Against this background, we report on an online experiment in which we analyzed data from N = 1,183 people. The data was collected in German-speaking countries (Germany, Austria, Switzerland). The participants were asked to imagine they had been suffering from medical conditions of unknown origin for some time and that they were therefore visiting a health center to seek advice from a doctor. We developed descriptions of patient-doctor interactions (referred to as vignettes), thereby manipulating the patient’s interaction partner: (i) human doctor, (ii) human doctor with an AI system, and (iii) an AI system only (i.e., chatbot). Furthermore, we manipulated medical discipline: (i) cardiology, (ii) orthopedics, (iii) dermatology, and (iv) psychiatry. Based on this 3 × 4 experimental within-subjects design, our results indicate that people prefer a human doctor, followed by a human doctor with an AI system, and an AI system alone came in last place. Specifically, based on these 12 hypothetical interaction situations, we found a significant main effect of a patient’s interaction partner on trust, distrust, perceived privacy invasion, information disclosure, treatment adherence, and satisfaction. Moreover, perceptions of trust, distrust, and privacy invasion predicted information disclosure, treatment adherence, and satisfaction as a function of interaction partner and medical discipline. We found that the situation in psychiatry is different from the other three disciplines. Specifically, the six outcome variables differed strongly between psychiatry and the three other disciplines in the “human doctor with an AI system” condition, while this effect was not that strong in the other conditions (human doctor, chatbot). These findings have important implications for the use of AI in medical care and in the interaction between patients and their doctors.
Original languageEnglish
Article number1422177
Number of pages13
JournalFrontiers in Psychology
Volume15
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2024

Fields of science

  • 303026 Public health
  • 305909 Stress research
  • 102 Computer Sciences
  • 102006 Computer supported cooperative work (CSCW)
  • 102015 Information systems
  • 102016 IT security
  • 502007 E-commerce
  • 502014 Innovation research
  • 502030 Project management
  • 509026 Digitalisation research
  • 501016 Educational psychology
  • 602036 Neurolinguistics
  • 501030 Cognitive science
  • 502032 Quality management
  • 502043 Business consultancy
  • 502044 Business management
  • 502050 Business informatics
  • 502058 Digital transformation
  • 503008 E-learning
  • 509004 Evaluation research
  • 301407 Neurophysiology
  • 301401 Brain research

JKU Focus areas

  • Digital Transformation

Cite this