Knowledge of Artificial Intelligence Predicts Lower AI Receptivity

Pub Date : 2023-06-16 DOI:10.31234/osf.io/t9u8g
Stephanie Tully, Chiara Longoni, Gil Appel
{"title":"Knowledge of Artificial Intelligence Predicts Lower AI Receptivity","authors":"Stephanie Tully, Chiara Longoni, Gil Appel","doi":"10.31234/osf.io/t9u8g","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As the field of artificial intelligence (AI) continues to progress and transform society, understanding the factors that influence receptivity towards AI has become increasingly important. Yet, little is known about how systematic differences across consumers predict AI receptivity. The current research investigates whether and how knowledge about AI influences consumers’ receptivity towards AI. To this end, we develop and validate an AI Literacy Test (AILT), a novel instrument designed to measure individuals’ objective knowledge about AI and algorithms. In contrast to three surveys documenting that most people expect greater AI knowledge to predict greater AI receptivity, the authors find the reverse; people with greater AI knowledge have a lower preference for using AI-based products and services. This reduction is not indiscriminate and is particularly pervasive for tasks that require more subjectivity to be performed well. However, greater knowledge of AI does not lead to increased AI utilization propensity among even highly objective tasks. These findings suggest that there may be unintended consequences of policymakers’ efforts to educate the public about AI, and that companies marketing AI product and services may need to re-evaluate which target segments may be more likely to adopt their technologies.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/t9u8g","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As the field of artificial intelligence (AI) continues to progress and transform society, understanding the factors that influence receptivity towards AI has become increasingly important. Yet, little is known about how systematic differences across consumers predict AI receptivity. The current research investigates whether and how knowledge about AI influences consumers’ receptivity towards AI. To this end, we develop and validate an AI Literacy Test (AILT), a novel instrument designed to measure individuals’ objective knowledge about AI and algorithms. In contrast to three surveys documenting that most people expect greater AI knowledge to predict greater AI receptivity, the authors find the reverse; people with greater AI knowledge have a lower preference for using AI-based products and services. This reduction is not indiscriminate and is particularly pervasive for tasks that require more subjectivity to be performed well. However, greater knowledge of AI does not lead to increased AI utilization propensity among even highly objective tasks. These findings suggest that there may be unintended consequences of policymakers’ efforts to educate the public about AI, and that companies marketing AI product and services may need to re-evaluate which target segments may be more likely to adopt their technologies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
人工智能知识预测较低的人工智能接受度
随着人工智能(AI)领域的不断进步和改变社会,了解影响人工智能接受度的因素变得越来越重要。然而,人们对消费者之间的系统差异如何预测人工智能的接受程度知之甚少。目前的研究调查了人工智能知识是否以及如何影响消费者对人工智能的接受度。为此,我们开发并验证了人工智能素养测试(AILT),这是一种旨在衡量个人对人工智能和算法的客观知识的新工具。三项调查显示,大多数人期望更多的人工智能知识能够预测更大的人工智能接受度,与此相反,作者发现情况恰恰相反;拥有更多人工智能知识的人对使用基于人工智能的产品和服务的偏好较低。这种减少并不是不分青红皂白的,对于需要更多主观性才能很好地执行的任务尤其普遍。然而,更多的人工智能知识并不会增加人工智能在高度客观任务中的使用倾向。这些发现表明,政策制定者对公众进行人工智能教育的努力可能会产生意想不到的后果,而营销人工智能产品和服务的公司可能需要重新评估哪些目标群体更有可能采用他们的技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1