skip to main content
10.1145/3306618.3314232acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaiesConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

"Scary Robots": Examining Public Responses to AI

Published: 27 January 2019 Publication History

Abstract

How AI is perceived by the public can have significant impact on how it is developed, deployed and regulated. Some commentators argue that perceptions are currently distorted or extreme. This paper discusses the results of a nationally representative survey of the UK population on their perceptions of AI. The survey solicited responses to eight common narratives about AI (four optimistic, four pessimistic), plus views on what AI is, how likely it is to impact in respondents' lifetimes, and whether they can influence it. 42% of respondents offered a plausible definition of AI, while 25% thought it meant robots. Of the narratives presented, those associated with automation were best known, followed by the idea that AI would become more powerful than humans. Overall results showed that the most common visions of the impact of AI elicit significant anxiety. Only two of the eight narratives elicited more excitement than concern (AI making life easier, and extending life). Respondents felt they had no control over AI's development, citing the power of corporations or government, or versions of technological determinism. Negotiating the deployment of AI will require contending with these anxieties.

References

[1]
Mimi An. 2017. Artificial Intelligence is Here - People Just Don't Realize It. HubSpot.
[2]
ARM and Northstar. 2017. AI today, AI tomorrow: Awareness, acceptance and anticipation of AI: A global consumer perspective. Retrieved from http://pages.arm.com/rs/312-SAX-488/images/arm-ai-survey-report.pdf
[3]
Brhmie Balaram, Tony Greenham, and Jasmine Leonard. 2018. Artificial Intel-ligence: real public engagement. RSA, London. Retrieved November 5, 2018 from https://www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/reports/artificial-intelligence-real-public-engagement
[4]
Margaret A. Boden. 2016. AI: its nature and future. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
[5]
Stephen Cave, Claire Craig, Kanta Dihal, Sarah Dillon, Jessica Montgomery, Beth Singler, and Lindsay Taylor. 2018. Portrayals and Perceptions of AI and Why They Matter. The Royal Society, London. Retrieved from https://royalsociety.org/~/media/policy/projects/ai-narratives/AI-narratives-workshop-findings.pdf
[6]
Stephen Cave and Kanta Dihal. 2019. Hopes and fears for intelligent ma-chines in fiction and reality. Nature Machine Intelligence 1, 2 (February 2019), 74--78.
[7]
Dawn Collis. 2009. Social Grade: A Classification Tool. Ipsos MediaCT. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20160315075958/https://www.ipsos-mo-ri.com/DownloadPublication/1285_MediaCT_thoughtpiece_Social_Grade_July09_V3_WEB.pdf
[8]
Sarah Dillon and Jennifer Schaffer-Goddard. forthcoming. What AI Re-searchers Read: The Role of Literature in Artificial Intelligence Research. (forthcoming).
[9]
James Dipple-Johnstone. 2018. ICO statement in response to Facebook data breach announcement. Information Commissioner's Office. Retrieved Novem-ber 5, 2018 from https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/news-and-events/news-and-blogs/2018/09/ico-statement-in-response-to-facebook-data-breach-announcement/
[10]
Helen Edwards. 2017. There's a fine line between what people want robots to do and not do for them. Quartz. Retrieved November 5, 2018 from https://qz.com/1101460/theres-a-fine-line-between-what-people-want-robots-to-do-and-not-do-for-them/
[11]
Ethan Fast and Eric Horvitz. 2016. Long-Term Trends in the Public Percep-tion of Artificial Intelligence. arXiv:1609.04904v2 {cs.CL} (September 2016). Retrieved August 21, 2018 from https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.04904
[12]
Susan Gubar. 1980. C.L. Moore and the Conventions of Women's Science Fiction (C.L. Moore et les conventions de la science-fiction féminine). Science Fiction Studies 7, 1 (1980), 16--27.
[13]
Roslynn D. Haynes. 2017. From madman to crime fighter: the scientist in western culture. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
[14]
IPSOS Mori and Royal Society. 2017. Public views of Machine Learning: Findings from public research and engagement conducted on behalf of the Royal Society. IPSOS Mori Social Research Institute, London.
[15]
Deborah G. Johnson and Mario Verdicchio. 2017. Reframing AI Discourse. Minds and Machines 27, 4 (December 2017), 575--590.
[16]
Vincent C. Müller and Nick Bostrom. 2016. Future Progress in Artificial In-telligence: A Survey of Expert Opinion. Fundamental Issues of Artificial Intel-ligence (2016), 555--572.
[17]
Ofcom. 2017. Adults' media use and attitudes. Retrieved from https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/102755/adults-media-use-attitudes-2017.pdf
[18]
Jennifer Robertson. 2010. Gendering Humanoid Robots: Robo-Sexism in Japan. Body & Society 16, 2 (June 2010), 1--36.
[19]
Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence. 2018. AI in the UK: ready, will-ing, and able? House of Lords, London. Retrieved from https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201719/ldselect/ldai/100/100.pdf
[20]
SPACE10. ongoing. Do You Speak Human? Retrieved November 5, 2018 from http://doyouspeakhuman.com
[21]
The Pennsylvania State University. 2019. S.3.2 Hypothesis Testing (P-Value Approach). PennState: Statistics Online Courses. Retrieved January 16, 2019 from https://newonlinecourses.science.psu.edu/statprogram/reviews/statistical-concepts/hypothesis-testing/p-value-approach
[22]
Lisa Tuttle. 2018. Women in SF. The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction. Re-trieved January 16, 2019 from http://www.sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/women_in_sf
[23]
Weber Shandwick and KRC Research. 2016. AI-Ready or not: artificial intel-ligence here we come! What consumers think & what marketers need to know. Weber Shandwick, New York.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Sécurité, IA et confiance en Afrique : une approche réflexiveCommunication, technologies et développement10.4000/12nfi16Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)The Future of Artificial Intelligence Will Be “Next to Normal”—A Perspective on Future Directions and the Psychology of AI Safety ConcernsNature Anthropology10.35534/natanthropol.2024.100012:1(10001-10001)Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)An Alien in the Newsroom: AI Anxiety in European and American NewspapersSocial Sciences10.3390/socsci1311060813:11(608)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
AIES '19: Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society
January 2019
577 pages
ISBN:9781450363242
DOI:10.1145/3306618
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial International 4.0 License.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 27 January 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. AI ethics
  2. AI policy
  3. public perception
  4. science communication

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

  • Leverhulme Trust

Conference

AIES '19
Sponsor:
AIES '19: AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society
January 27 - 28, 2019
HI, Honolulu, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 61 of 162 submissions, 38%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)7,569
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)158
Reflects downloads up to 04 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Sécurité, IA et confiance en Afrique : une approche réflexiveCommunication, technologies et développement10.4000/12nfi16Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)The Future of Artificial Intelligence Will Be “Next to Normal”—A Perspective on Future Directions and the Psychology of AI Safety ConcernsNature Anthropology10.35534/natanthropol.2024.100012:1(10001-10001)Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)An Alien in the Newsroom: AI Anxiety in European and American NewspapersSocial Sciences10.3390/socsci1311060813:11(608)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2024
  • (2024)Perception and Ethical Challenges for the Future of AI as Encountered by Surveyed New EngineersSocieties10.3390/soc1412027114:12(271)Online publication date: 18-Dec-2024
  • (2024)Understanding and Perception of Automated Text Generation among the Public: Two Surveys with Representative Samples in GermanyBehavioral Sciences10.3390/bs1405035314:5(353)Online publication date: 23-Apr-2024
  • (2024)Pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards artificial intelligence and its integration into EFL teaching and learningJournal of Language and Cultural Education10.2478/jolace-2023-003111:3(100-114)Online publication date: 2-Feb-2024
  • (2024)Can artificial intelligence replace assurance, governance and risk management professionals?Risk Governance and Control: Financial Markets and Institutions10.22495/rgcv14i2p314:2(25-31)Online publication date: 2-May-2024
  • (2024)Verhandlungen von Künstlicher Intelligenz und zugehörigen Medienkompetenzen in Online-KommentarenMedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung10.21240/mpaed/00/2024.04.18.X(195-220)Online publication date: 18-Apr-2024
  • (2024)AI Privacy in Context: A Comparative Study of Public and Institutional Discourse on Conversational AI Privacy in the US and Chinese Social MediaSocial Media + Society10.1177/2056305124129084510:4Online publication date: 28-Oct-2024
  • (2024)ChatGPT in the public eye: Ethical principles and generative concerns in social media discussionsNew Media & Society10.1177/14614448241279034Online publication date: 21-Sep-2024
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media