  I study the role of minimum wage as an anchor for judgements of the fairness
of wages by both human subjects and artificial intelligence (AI). Through
surveys of human subjects enrolled in the crowdsourcing platform Prolific.co
and queries submitted to the OpenAI's language model GPT-3, I test whether the
numerical response for what wage is deemed fair for a particular job
description changes when respondents and GPT-3 are prompted with additional
information that includes a numerical minimum wage, whether realistic or
unrealistic, relative to a control where no minimum wage is stated. I find that
the minimum wage influences the distribution of responses for the wage
considered fair by shifting the mean response toward the minimum wage, thus
establishing the minimum wage's role as an anchor for judgements of fairness.
However, for unrealistically high minimum wages, namely $50 and $100, the
distribution of responses splits into two distinct modes, one that
approximately follows the anchor and one that remains close to the control,
albeit with an overall upward shift towards the anchor. The anchor exerts a
similar effect on the AI bot; however, the wage that the AI bot perceives as
fair exhibits a systematic downward shift compared to human subjects'
responses. For unrealistic values of the anchor, the responses of the bot also
split into two modes but with a smaller proportion of the responses adhering to
the anchor compared to human subjects. As with human subjects, the remaining
responses are close to the control group for the AI bot but also exhibit a
systematic shift towards the anchor. During experimentation, I noted some
variability in the bot responses depending on small perturbations of the
prompt, so I also test variability in the bot's responses with respect to more
meaningful differences in gender and race cues in the prompt, finding anomalies
in the distribution of responses.
