Paper
When an AI Judges Your Work: The Hidden Costs of Algorithmic Assessment
Authors
David Almog, Lucas Lippman, Daniel Martin
Abstract
We use an online experiment with a real work task to study whether workers change their behavior when they know AI will be used to judge their work instead of humans. We find that individuals produce a higher quantity of output when they are assigned an AI evaluator. However, controlling for quantity, the quality of their output is lower, regardless of whether quality is measured using humans or LLM grades. We also find that workers are more likely to use external tools, including LLMs, when they know AI is used to judge their work instead of humans. However, the increase in external tool use does not appear to explain the differences in quantity or quality across treatments.
Metadata
Related papers
Vibe Coding XR: Accelerating AI + XR Prototyping with XR Blocks and Gemini
Ruofei Du, Benjamin Hersh, David Li, Nels Numan, Xun Qian, Yanhe Chen, Zhongy... • 2026-03-25
Comparing Developer and LLM Biases in Code Evaluation
Aditya Mittal, Ryan Shar, Zichu Wu, Shyam Agarwal, Tongshuang Wu, Chris Donah... • 2026-03-25
The Stochastic Gap: A Markovian Framework for Pre-Deployment Reliability and Oversight-Cost Auditing in Agentic Artificial Intelligence
Biplab Pal, Santanu Bhattacharya • 2026-03-25
Retrieval Improvements Do Not Guarantee Better Answers: A Study of RAG for AI Policy QA
Saahil Mathur, Ryan David Rittner, Vedant Ajit Thakur, Daniel Stuart Schiff, ... • 2026-03-25
MARCH: Multi-Agent Reinforced Self-Check for LLM Hallucination
Zhuo Li, Yupeng Zhang, Pengyu Cheng, Jiajun Song, Mengyu Zhou, Hao Li, Shujie... • 2026-03-25
Raw Data (Debug)
{
"raw_xml": "<entry>\n <id>http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.02076v1</id>\n <title>When an AI Judges Your Work: The Hidden Costs of Algorithmic Assessment</title>\n <updated>2026-03-02T17:01:44Z</updated>\n <link href='https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.02076v1' rel='alternate' type='text/html'/>\n <link href='https://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.02076v1' rel='related' title='pdf' type='application/pdf'/>\n <summary>We use an online experiment with a real work task to study whether workers change their behavior when they know AI will be used to judge their work instead of humans. We find that individuals produce a higher quantity of output when they are assigned an AI evaluator. However, controlling for quantity, the quality of their output is lower, regardless of whether quality is measured using humans or LLM grades. We also find that workers are more likely to use external tools, including LLMs, when they know AI is used to judge their work instead of humans. However, the increase in external tool use does not appear to explain the differences in quantity or quality across treatments.</summary>\n <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='econ.GN'/>\n <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='cs.HC'/>\n <published>2026-03-02T17:01:44Z</published>\n <arxiv:primary_category term='econ.GN'/>\n <author>\n <name>David Almog</name>\n </author>\n <author>\n <name>Lucas Lippman</name>\n </author>\n <author>\n <name>Daniel Martin</name>\n </author>\n </entry>"
}