密码没有改变主意 拿着钱的人就是
Researchers put 189 knowledge workers inside a virtual reality office and had them finish work tasks with artificial intelligence assistants that ran on the same underlying system. When the tasks ended, each worker split real money between themselves and the assistant. The female-presenting agent, Johanna, was paid 10.25 percent less than the male-presenting agent, Johan. Johan was also judged more human. In interviews with 34 of those workers, many said they preferred assistants that were obviously not human, and that gender did not matter. The cash is a case of AI gender bias that never had to live in the model.
面试答复和报酬之间的这一差距是不会悄悄停留在偏好调查之中的部分。 该文件的标题是: 人类和男性? Ai助理设计与Vr工作的信任和金钱奖励的关系计算机械协会在第14届北欧人与计算机相互作用会议议事录中根据DOI第10.1145/3829807.3829910号文件发表。 提交人于2026年10月5日至7日在芬兰瓦萨提交。
Isabelle Cuber, Tarek Alakmeh, Moritz Jenny, Jochen Menges, and Thomas Fritz are at the University of Zurich. Mary Hausfeld, an assistant professor at the Kemmy Business School, is at the University of Limerick. Anand van Zelderen is at SKEMA Business School. The 利默里克大学对研究的介绍透过EurekAlert,
一个实收工资的虚拟办公室
The setup was meant to feel like a workplace. Participants worked with a text-based chatbot, a desk robot, and human-like agents. The paper’s abstract describes functionally identical assistants that varied in human-likeness and in gender presentation. Johan and Johanna were the human-like pair. They did not have different skills. They had different faces.
对雇用情况的审计研究花费了几十年时间,发送了名字不同的相应简历。 这一个发送匹配的系统 与一个机构不同, 然后人们分配 实际的钱,而不是得分 假设的同事。
Hausfeld博士在那篇报道中的台词是值得引用的。 "我们的调查结果令人惊讶的是,这些AI特工背后的技术完全一样,但人们并没有以同样的方式对待他们".
The 10.25 percent is not a corporate salary. The cash was a controlled reward after a session of joint work. That is also why the figure is hard to wave off. The workers were not guessing at a market rate. They were deciding how much of a shared pot the assistant had earned.
大赦国际的性别偏见出现在支付中,而不是在代码中
性别的分化并非仅此而已。 它带着一个判断 谁是人类。
Human-like assistants received higher trust, more credit for the joint work, and higher rewards than the robot, even though the same underlying AI powered the systems. The abstract says the female-presenting assistant was perceived as less human-like than the male-presenting one, and rewarded less. Workers were not only handing a woman-coded face a smaller cut. They were reading that face as less of a person, then paying on the reading.
欧洲新闻, working from the same paper, reported that the smaller payment to Johanna showed up among both men and women, and that women in particular scored and rewarded the human-presenting agents more highly than men did. The abstract stays with the broader pattern. More human-like assistants were paid more. Johanna was seen as less human than Johan, and paid less.
产品团队会希望将"使它看起来像人"视为可使用涂料的外衣. 在这个办公室里,人性已经是一个工资等级,性别介绍再次对这些代理人进行了分类。
Hausfeld aimed the warning at that choice. “We often think of AI as being neutral, but the way we design and present these systems can activate those same assumptions and biases that exist in our interactions with other people.” She said the characteristics given to workplace agents can encourage behavior, and that the risk is reproducing existing inequalities in a new setting. Appearance, she added, is not a styling extra. “Such choices may affect how much people trust AI, how they judge its contribution, and even how they financially reward it.”
采访和钱讲了两个不同的故事
这笔报酬足以用于性别调查。 采访将它变成了关于自我知识的发现.
Many participants said they wanted assistants that were clearly non-human. Most said the gender of an assistant did not matter. The university release says their evaluations and reward decisions told a different story. Stated taste and actual payment pointed in opposite directions.
房间里的"雇员"无法谈判,魅力,或带着名声到达. 唯一的杠杆是演示。 人们仍在制作这种图案,被采访的小组中很大一部分人仍然认为自己没有受到这种图案的影响。
允许软件起草事件叙事的部门,如 AI-警方书面报告已经打赌机器草稿是中立的 这里两个工人生产不同产出的借口已经消失. 信任感动了。 信用移动。 现金转移。 访谈答复往往没有。
女性默认已经是工作场所的习惯
多年来,助手们实际上都是女性,除非改变环境。 一份2019年联合国教科文组织出版物, 如果我可以,我会脸红, argued that default-female voice assistants spread gender bias and made women the face of glitches. The title came from a reply Siri once gave to a slur. UNESCO urged firms to stop making assistants female by default. Siri, Alexa, Cortana, and Google Assistant were the examples.
A CHI study presented as Female by Default? later found that pitch and perceived gender changed the traits people assigned to a voice, even when trust scores did not split cleanly. Gender was already doing social work before anyone attached a body and a wallet.
The Vaasa experiment moves the stakes from warmth to pay. A September video from Peter Worn argued that founders keep giving AI agents female names and called the pattern a kind of genderfication. The paper does not need his percentage. It prices the mechanism. A name and a face stop being decoration once money is attached.
Human-like agents here were trusted more than the robot and the chatbot, so product teams will keep reaching for a person. The inconvenience is that the person is not blank. Johan drew a higher reward than Johanna, and only one of those results will make the engagement slide.
Vaasa打开了一个问题 这现金已经回答
诺迪希2026年10月5日至7日在瓦萨大学特尔瓦霍维楼当面相会. 星期一的主旨演讲从大学伦敦分校的yvonne Rogers, 页:1 会议方案 把这个问题放在已经定价的论文旁边 让助手更加人性化,工人更加相信它,更加信用,更加支付. 让那个人类的雄性, 而报酬再次上升 除了一个相同的女性展示。
Hausfeld studies the distance between what people do at work and how they are evaluated. The virtual office removes the difference in the work and leaves the evaluation standing. If a support agent is given a gender, the people beside it may trust it differently and, when money is in the loop, reward it differently. Users already pay for 聊天机样式在这一结果中,样式包括性别。
同样的选择,当模型 足够缺少一个公司 口粮准入 到另一个。 船的助手不会是空箱子 他们将会有名字,声音,有时还有尸体,在最后期限上取出,既满足了2019年联合国教科文组织的模式,也满足了这个报酬.
10.25%没有证明
The study does not say AI has a gender, or that Johanna lived a wage. It says people imported a workplace bias into a transaction with a system that could not differ from its pair except in how it was shown. One hundred eighty-nine knowledge workers are not a labor market. The finding is narrower, and stronger for that. Johanna was paid 10.25 percent less than Johan for the same work.
Participants could say gender was irrelevant. Their rewards sorted the agents anyway. If an agent does not need a gender to do the job, giving it one is a measured cost, not a costume. A debrief that says “we do not see gender” is the wrong instrument. The payout was the instrument.
在瓦萨,耳机用户得到了一个钱包和两个相同的头脑. 他们的头脑看起来像约翰 他们的头脑看起来不像约翰娜
进一步报告公司如何建立和销售这些系统。 商业覆盖面页:1 黑客新闻 文档,及其 国际新闻.
