This study examines how members of the public frame artificial intelligence (AI) along with how news use predicts “frames in mind” for AI. The study also tests whether news use, science fiction viewing, and discussing technology influence attitudes toward AI independently and in conjunction with one another. The analyses use data from a nationally representative online panel survey. Respondents invoked social progress and Pandora’s box frames for AI, and technology news use predicted mentioning each frame. Use of technology news also predicted change in support for AI, while science fiction viewing and discussing technology were conditionally related to such change.
This research note examines how framing influences attitudes toward artificial intelligence (AI). It uses an experiment embedded in a nationally representative online survey to test the effects of text-based frames and visuals on opinion about developing, funding, and banning AI. Participants exposed to a “social progress” frame reported greater support for AI than those exposed to a “Pandora’s box” frame. Images (virtual assistants, personal robots, menacing movie AIs, or none) did not influence opinion by themselves but interacted with textual frames to do so. The results extend our understanding of framing effects on public attitudes toward emerging technologies.
As gene editing technologies such as CRISPR have become increasingly prominent, so have media portrayals of them. With this in mind, the present study builds on theoretical accounts of framing effects, cultivation effects, and genre-specific viewing effects to examine how different forms of media use predict attitudes toward applications of gene editing. Specifically, the study tests how news use, overall television viewing, and science fiction viewing are related to such attitudes. The analyses draw on original data from two surveys of the U.S. public, one conducted in 2020 and the other in 2021. The results from both surveys indicate that news use and overall television viewing predict support for uses of gene editing, whereas science fiction viewing is not significantly related to opinion. The findings suggest that media frames and images may carry implications for the trajectory of public opinion about gene editing technologies and, ultimately, the social context for their development and adoption.
This study examines how different forms of media use predict attitudes toward the development of facial recognition technology (FRT) and applications of it by law enforcement to identify criminal suspects, identify potential terrorists, and monitor public protests. The theoretical framework builds on theories of cultivation and genre-specific viewing to develop hypotheses and research questions. The analyses draw on original data from two nationally representative surveys of the U.S. public conducted in 2020, amid a series of controversies and protests about policing and racial justice. The results demonstrate that overall television viewing and crime media viewing predicted support for multiple uses of FRT, while Fox News viewing predicted support for using FRT to monitor protests. The findings advance our understanding of public opinion toward the technology and its implications for policing, protests, and social justice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.