人们对自己和他人使用以人工智能为媒介的通信工具有着不同的期望。

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY British journal of psychology Pub Date : 2024-09-04 DOI:10.1111/bjop.12727
Zoe A Purcell, Mengchen Dong, Anne-Marie Nussberger, Nils Köbis, Maurice Jakesch
{"title":"人们对自己和他人使用以人工智能为媒介的通信工具有着不同的期望。","authors":"Zoe A Purcell, Mengchen Dong, Anne-Marie Nussberger, Nils Köbis, Maurice Jakesch","doi":"10.1111/bjop.12727","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Artificial intelligence (AI) can enhance human communication, for example, by improving the quality of our writing, voice or appearance. However, AI mediated communication also has risks-it may increase deception, compromise authenticity or yield widespread mistrust. As a result, both policymakers and technology firms are developing approaches to prevent and reduce potentially unacceptable uses of AI communication technologies. However, we do not yet know what people believe is acceptable or what their expectations are regarding usage. Drawing on normative psychology theories, we examine people's judgements of the acceptability of open and secret AI use, as well as people's expectations of their own and others' use. In two studies with representative samples (Study 1: N = 477; Study 2: N = 765), we find that people are less accepting of secret than open AI use in communication, but only when directly compared. Our results also suggest that people believe others will use AI communication tools more than they would themselves and that people do not expect others' use to align with their expectations of what is acceptable. While much attention has been focused on transparency measures, our results suggest that self-other differences are a central factor for understanding people's attitudes and expectations for AI-mediated communication.</p>","PeriodicalId":9300,"journal":{"name":"British journal of psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"People have different expectations for their own versus others' use of AI-mediated communication tools.\",\"authors\":\"Zoe A Purcell, Mengchen Dong, Anne-Marie Nussberger, Nils Köbis, Maurice Jakesch\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bjop.12727\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Artificial intelligence (AI) can enhance human communication, for example, by improving the quality of our writing, voice or appearance. However, AI mediated communication also has risks-it may increase deception, compromise authenticity or yield widespread mistrust. As a result, both policymakers and technology firms are developing approaches to prevent and reduce potentially unacceptable uses of AI communication technologies. However, we do not yet know what people believe is acceptable or what their expectations are regarding usage. Drawing on normative psychology theories, we examine people's judgements of the acceptability of open and secret AI use, as well as people's expectations of their own and others' use. In two studies with representative samples (Study 1: N = 477; Study 2: N = 765), we find that people are less accepting of secret than open AI use in communication, but only when directly compared. Our results also suggest that people believe others will use AI communication tools more than they would themselves and that people do not expect others' use to align with their expectations of what is acceptable. While much attention has been focused on transparency measures, our results suggest that self-other differences are a central factor for understanding people's attitudes and expectations for AI-mediated communication.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British journal of psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British journal of psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12727\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12727","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人工智能(AI)可以提高人类交流的质量,例如,提高我们的写作、语音或外表的质量。然而,以人工智能为媒介的交流也有风险--它可能会增加欺骗、损害真实性或产生广泛的不信任。因此,政策制定者和技术公司都在开发各种方法,以防止和减少人工智能通信技术潜在的不可接受的用途。然而,我们还不知道人们认为什么是可接受的,也不知道他们对使用的期望是什么。借鉴规范心理学理论,我们研究了人们对公开和秘密使用人工智能的可接受性的判断,以及人们对自己和他人使用人工智能的期望。在两项具有代表性的样本研究(研究 1:N = 477;研究 2:N = 765)中,我们发现人们在交流中对秘密使用人工智能的接受程度低于对公开使用人工智能的接受程度,但仅限于直接比较时。我们的研究结果还表明,人们相信他人会比自己更多使用人工智能交流工具,而且人们并不期望他人的使用符合他们对可接受程度的期望。虽然人们的注意力主要集中在透明度测量上,但我们的结果表明,自我与他人的差异是理解人们对以人工智能为媒介的交流的态度和期望的核心因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
People have different expectations for their own versus others' use of AI-mediated communication tools.

Artificial intelligence (AI) can enhance human communication, for example, by improving the quality of our writing, voice or appearance. However, AI mediated communication also has risks-it may increase deception, compromise authenticity or yield widespread mistrust. As a result, both policymakers and technology firms are developing approaches to prevent and reduce potentially unacceptable uses of AI communication technologies. However, we do not yet know what people believe is acceptable or what their expectations are regarding usage. Drawing on normative psychology theories, we examine people's judgements of the acceptability of open and secret AI use, as well as people's expectations of their own and others' use. In two studies with representative samples (Study 1: N = 477; Study 2: N = 765), we find that people are less accepting of secret than open AI use in communication, but only when directly compared. Our results also suggest that people believe others will use AI communication tools more than they would themselves and that people do not expect others' use to align with their expectations of what is acceptable. While much attention has been focused on transparency measures, our results suggest that self-other differences are a central factor for understanding people's attitudes and expectations for AI-mediated communication.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British journal of psychology
British journal of psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
2.50%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Psychology publishes original research on all aspects of general psychology including cognition; health and clinical psychology; developmental, social and occupational psychology. For information on specific requirements, please view Notes for Contributors. We attract a large number of international submissions each year which make major contributions across the range of psychology.
期刊最新文献
Daily effects of a brief compassion-focused intervention for self-compassion. Inter-brain synchrony is associated with greater shared identity within naturalistic conversational pairs. The differences in essential facial areas for impressions between humans and deep learning models: An eye-tracking and explainable AI approach. Explainability increases trust resilience in intelligent agents. A new way to conceptualize intolerance of uncertainty among adolescents: Embracing the network perspective.
×
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