IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/284sm_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Public Opinion Toward Artificial Intelligence

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Baobao

    (Cornell University)

Abstract

This chapter in the Oxford Handbook of AI Governance synthesizes and discusses research on public opinion toward artificial intelligence (AI). This chapter synthesizes and discusses research on public opinion toward artificial intelligence (AI). Understanding citizens' and consumers' attitudes toward AI is important from a normative standpoint because the public is a major stakeholder in shaping the future of the technology and should have a voice in policy discussions. Furthermore, the research could help us anticipate future political and consumer behavior. Survey data worldwide show that the public is increasingly aware of AI; however, they -- unlike AI researchers -- tend to anthropomorphize AI. Demographic differences correlate with trust in AI in general: those living in East Asia have higher levels of trust in AI, while women and those of lower socioeconomic status across different regions have lower levels of trust. Surveys that focus on particular AI applications, including facial recognition technology, personalization algorithms, lethal autonomous weapons, and workplace automation, add complexity to this research topic. I conclude this chapter by recommending four new topics for future studies: 1) institutional trust in actors building and deploying AI systems, 2) the impact of knowledge and experience on attitudes toward AI, 3) heterogeneity in attitudes toward AI, and 4) the relationship between attitudes and behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Baobao, 2021. "Public Opinion Toward Artificial Intelligence," OSF Preprints 284sm_v1, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:284sm_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/284sm_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/615efb1642b47400dc00e916/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/284sm_v1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carl Benedikt Frey & Thor Berger & Chinchih Chen, 2018. "Political machinery: did robots swing the 2016 US presidential election?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 34(3), pages 418-442.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    2. Jeffrey, Karen, 2020. "Automation and the Future of Work: How Rhetoric Shapes the Response in Policy Preferences," SocArXiv beqra, Center for Open Science.
    3. Gabriel Loumeau, 2022. "Land Consolidation Reforms: A Natural Experiment on the Economic and Political Effects of Agricultural Mechanization," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 22/376, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    4. Thomas Kurer & Nikolas Schöll, 2021. "How Technological Change Affects Regional Electorates," Working Papers 1269, Barcelona School of Economics.
    5. Moradi, Pegah, 2019. "Race, Ethnicity, and the Future of Work," SocArXiv e37cu, Center for Open Science.
    6. Aina Gallego & Thomas Kurer & Nikolas Schöll, 2018. "Not so disruptive after all: How workplace digitalization affects political preferences," Economics Working Papers 1623, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    7. Colantone, Italo & Ottaviano, Gianmarco & Stanig, Piero, 2021. "The backlash of globalization," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113860, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Nicole Wu, 2023. "“Restrict foreigners, not robots”: Partisan responses to automation threat," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 505-528, July.
    9. Brey, Björn, 2024. "The effect of recent technological change on US immigration policy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    10. Klump, Rainer & Jurkat, Anne & Schneider, Florian, 2021. "Tracking the rise of robots: A survey of the IFR database and its applications," MPRA Paper 107909, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Gallego, Aina & Kurer, Thomas & Schöll, Nikolas, 2020. "Neither Left-Behind nor Superstar: Ordinary Winners of Digitalization at the Ballot," SocArXiv mu3tw, Center for Open Science.
    12. Cuccu, Liliana & Pontarollo, Nicola, 2024. "Logistic hubs and support for radical-right populism: Evidence from Italy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    13. Korn, Tobias & Lacroix, Jean, 2024. "The Bankruptcy Express: Market Integration, Organizational Changes, and Financial distress in 19th century Britain," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-731, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    14. François Facchini & Louis Jaeck, 2021. "Populism and the rational choice model: The case of the French National Front," Rationality and Society, , vol. 33(2), pages 196-228, May.
    15. Golin, M. & Rauh, C., 2022. "The Impact of Fear of Automation," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2269, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    16. Christian Gschwendt, 2022. "Routine job dynamics in the Swiss labor market," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 158(1), pages 1-21, December.
    17. Thomas Ferguson & Benjamin Page & Jacob Rothschild & Jie Chen & Arturo Chang, 2018. "The Economic and Social Roots of Populist Rebellion: Support for Donald Trump in 2016," Working Papers Series 83, Institute for New Economic Thinking.
    18. Italo Colantone & Gianmarco I.P. Ottaviano & Piero Stanig, 2021. "The Backlash of Globalization," CESifo Working Paper Series 9289, CESifo.
    19. David Hope & Julian Limberg & Nina Weber, 2023. "Technological Change, Task Complexity, and Preferences for Redistribution," ifo Working Paper Series 398, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    20. Ekaterina Zhuravskaya & Maria Petrova & Ruben Enikolopov, 2020. "Political Effects of the Internet and Social Media," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 415-438, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:284sm_v1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.