公众眼中的 ChatGPT:社交媒体讨论中的伦理原则和生成问题

IF 4.5 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION New Media & Society Pub Date : 2024-09-23 DOI:10.1177/14614448241279034
Maayan Cohen, Michael Khavkin, Danielle Movsowitz Davidow, Eran Toch
{"title":"公众眼中的 ChatGPT:社交媒体讨论中的伦理原则和生成问题","authors":"Maayan Cohen, Michael Khavkin, Danielle Movsowitz Davidow, Eran Toch","doi":"10.1177/14614448241279034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With ChatGPT’s rapid adoption, concerns regarding generative artificial intelligence (AI) have shifted from theoretical to practical. Drawing upon the “algorithmic imaginary” framework from critical algorithm studies and the anthropological concept of “ordinary ethics,” we analyzed Twitter discourse during ChatGPT’s initial deployment, examining 368,359 tweets. Our analysis identified five topics reflecting functional and critical aspects of ChatGPT. We specifically point to two topics with a critical perspective: “Ethics” and “Concerns.” The first aligns with scholarly discussions in AI ethics on fairness and transparency, while the second focuses on ChatGPT’s generative capabilities. This highlights an emerging trend: While the academic discussion on AI ethics has gained popularity, especially in scrutinizing ChatGPT, the conversation is now expanding to more nuanced ethical deliberations. We analyzed the posts’ engagement and sentiment over time, demonstrating the AI ethics community’s influence in addressing the potential and harms of generative AI systems.","PeriodicalId":19149,"journal":{"name":"New Media & Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ChatGPT in the public eye: Ethical principles and generative concerns in social media discussions\",\"authors\":\"Maayan Cohen, Michael Khavkin, Danielle Movsowitz Davidow, Eran Toch\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14614448241279034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"With ChatGPT’s rapid adoption, concerns regarding generative artificial intelligence (AI) have shifted from theoretical to practical. Drawing upon the “algorithmic imaginary” framework from critical algorithm studies and the anthropological concept of “ordinary ethics,” we analyzed Twitter discourse during ChatGPT’s initial deployment, examining 368,359 tweets. Our analysis identified five topics reflecting functional and critical aspects of ChatGPT. We specifically point to two topics with a critical perspective: “Ethics” and “Concerns.” The first aligns with scholarly discussions in AI ethics on fairness and transparency, while the second focuses on ChatGPT’s generative capabilities. This highlights an emerging trend: While the academic discussion on AI ethics has gained popularity, especially in scrutinizing ChatGPT, the conversation is now expanding to more nuanced ethical deliberations. We analyzed the posts’ engagement and sentiment over time, demonstrating the AI ethics community’s influence in addressing the potential and harms of generative AI systems.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19149,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Media & Society\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Media & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448241279034\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Media & Society","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448241279034","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着 ChatGPT 的迅速普及,人们对生成式人工智能(AI)的关注已从理论转向实践。借鉴批判性算法研究中的 "算法想象 "框架和人类学中的 "普通伦理 "概念,我们分析了 ChatGPT 初期部署期间的 Twitter 话题,研究了 368,359 条推文。我们的分析确定了五个反映 ChatGPT 功能和关键方面的话题。我们特别指出了两个具有批判性视角的话题:"伦理 "和 "关注"。第一个话题与人工智能伦理中关于公平性和透明度的学术讨论相一致,第二个话题则关注 ChatGPT 的生成能力。这凸显了一种新兴趋势:虽然有关人工智能伦理的学术讨论,尤其是对 ChatGPT 的仔细研究已经深入人心,但对话现在正扩展到更细致入微的伦理讨论。我们分析了随着时间推移帖子的参与度和情感,显示了人工智能伦理社区在解决生成式人工智能系统的潜力和危害方面的影响力。
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
ChatGPT in the public eye: Ethical principles and generative concerns in social media discussions
With ChatGPT’s rapid adoption, concerns regarding generative artificial intelligence (AI) have shifted from theoretical to practical. Drawing upon the “algorithmic imaginary” framework from critical algorithm studies and the anthropological concept of “ordinary ethics,” we analyzed Twitter discourse during ChatGPT’s initial deployment, examining 368,359 tweets. Our analysis identified five topics reflecting functional and critical aspects of ChatGPT. We specifically point to two topics with a critical perspective: “Ethics” and “Concerns.” The first aligns with scholarly discussions in AI ethics on fairness and transparency, while the second focuses on ChatGPT’s generative capabilities. This highlights an emerging trend: While the academic discussion on AI ethics has gained popularity, especially in scrutinizing ChatGPT, the conversation is now expanding to more nuanced ethical deliberations. We analyzed the posts’ engagement and sentiment over time, demonstrating the AI ethics community’s influence in addressing the potential and harms of generative AI systems.
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
New Media & Society
New Media & Society COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
274
期刊介绍: New Media & Society engages in critical discussions of the key issues arising from the scale and speed of new media development, drawing on a wide range of disciplinary perspectives and on both theoretical and empirical research. The journal includes contributions on: -the individual and the social, the cultural and the political dimensions of new media -the global and local dimensions of the relationship between media and social change -contemporary as well as historical developments -the implications and impacts of, as well as the determinants and obstacles to, media change the relationship between theory, policy and practice.
期刊最新文献
Active bystanders in the forwarding of sexting messages: Applying a theory of planned behavior in youth Algorithmic media use and algorithm literacy: An integrative literature review Trust it or not: Understanding users’ motivations and strategies for assessing the credibility of AI-generated information Pathways from incidental news exposure to political knowledge: Examining paradoxical effects of political discussion on social media with strong and weak ties “PoV: You are reading an academic article.” The memetic performance of affiliation in TikTok’s platform vernacular
×
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