Rejected job applicants seldom receive explanations from employers. Techniques from Explainable AI could provide explanations at scale. Although Explainable AI researchers have developed many different types of explanations, we know little about the type of explanations job applicants want. We use a survey of recent job applicants to fill this gap. The survey generates three main insights: generic feedback frustrates applicants, applicants feel the employer has an obligation to provide an explanation, and job applicants want to know why they were unsuccessful and how to improve.

Algorithmic recourse promises to help applicants rejected by automated systems by explaining the changes needed to secure acceptance. What incentive do decision-makers, such as banks and employers, have to offer recourse? We study this question in a screening model in which recourse is both productive and selective: completing recourse improves an applicant’s value to the decision-maker, but applicants differ in their cost of completion. The optimal policy is a threshold rule: reject applicants with low scores, offer recourse to an intermediate range of scores, and accept applicants with high scores outright. Because the intermediate range spans the cutoff that would separate acceptance from rejection when recourse is not available, some marginal applicants gain a new path to acceptance, while others---who would have been accepted outright---must now clear a costly hurdle.

Mobile phone-based sports betting has exploded in popularity in many African countries. Commentators worry that low-ability gamblers will not learn from experience, and may rely on debt to gamble. Using data on financial transactions for over 50,000 Kenyan smartphone users, we find that gamblers do learn from experience. Gamblers are less likely to bet following poor results and more likely to bet following good results. The reaction to positive and negative feedback is of equal magnitude and is consistent with a model of Bayesian updating. Using an instrumental variables strategy, we find no evidence that increased gambling leads to increased debt.