Source author record

Andreas Ostermaier

Andreas Ostermaier appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
6topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2023arXiv

The moral authority of ChatGPT

ChatGPT is not only fun to chat with, but it also searches information, answers questions, and gives advice. With consistent moral advice, it might improve the moral judgment and decisions of users, who often hold contradictory moral beliefs. Unfortunately, ChatGPT turns out highly inconsistent as a moral advisor. Nonetheless, it influences users' moral judgment, we find in an experiment, even if they know they are advised by a chatting bot, and they underestimate how much they are influenced. Thus, ChatGPT threatens to corrupt rather than improves users' judgment. These findings raise the question of how to ensure the responsible use of ChatGPT and similar AI. Transparency is often touted but seems ineffective. We propose training to improve digital literacy.

preprint2022arXiv

Mandatory Disclosure of Standardized Sustainability Metrics: The Case of the EU Taxonomy Regulation

Sustainability reporting enables investors to make informed decisions and is hoped to facilitate the transition to a green economy. The European Union's taxonomy regulation enacts rules to discern sustainable activities and determine the resulting green revenue, whose disclosure is mandatory for many companies. In an experiment, we explore how this standardized metric is received by investors relative to a sustainability rating. We find that green revenue affects the investment probability more than the rating if the two metrics disagree. If they agree, a strong rating has an incremental effect on the investment probability. The effects are robust to variation in investors' attitudes. Our findings imply that a mandatory standardized sustainability metric is an effective means of channeling investment, which complements rather than substitutes sustainability ratings.