Provide the citation and attach a pdf of the article
Chen, Y.-N. K., & Wen, C.-H. R. (2020). Impacts of attitudes toward government and corporations on Public Trust in Artificial Intelligence. Communication Studies, 72(1), 115–131.
https://web-p-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.fhsu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&sid=ea114fa0-02c1-4e1c-a4ee-a05bf1f1a23f%40redis
What is the abstract of the article?
Artificial intelligence (AI) has alarmed the society of Taiwan believing it is responsible for potential surveillance, data theft and abuse, and other privacy infringements. By adopting the theory of motivated reasoning, this study explores how Taiwanese people’s perceptions of AI are affected by their institutional trust, attitudes toward the government and corporations, which are the two most common sponsors of scientific development. First, findings establish that respondents’ science trust in AI is made up of perceptions of AI and its science community, and they have lower faith in the AI science community than in AI alone. Second, the perceptions of both AI and its science community are positively associated with trust in government and corporations. Third, scientific news has a direct bearing on AI trust, but not on either government or corporation trust. By contrast, political news has no effect on either trust in AI or its science community, yet trust in government and corporations mediates the influence of political news on trust in AI and its science community. Finally, demographic variables hardly predict trust in AI, AI science community, government, and corporations, but education and gender are directly related to news consumption, which further influences institutional and science trust.
Was the study experimental or non-experimental?
The study was non-experimental because they put out a survey for people to complete without having stipulations or manipulations for people or a certain group.
Was the research qualitative or quantitative?
The data collected is qualitative, the researchers were not collecting numbers with their survey. They collected descriptions of what they do or have.
What was the population studied?
The people who participated were mainly from Dcard, which is Tawian’s largest online forum for college students and Facebook.
What sample was used for this study?
There were 1398 feedbacks from the survey they conducted, but the number of valid feedbacks was 1009.
What was the method of measurement?
The method of measurement was ratio, even though the questions they asked in the survey was qualitative. They compared the participants answered by using the percentages.
What was the method of analysis?
Graphs and percentages
What was the conclusion of the study?
The outcome of their study showed that age, education, gender, marital status, employment, city of residence, and family income are more willing to trust the news rather than the government. Only job status predicts public trust in AI science, but no variable is related to just the AI trust.
Why is this study useful to you? Explain in detail.
This information is useful for me because it showed me how people around the world trust AI. Some are not willing to give into it and some are all for it. Artificial Intelligence is everywhere and will continue to be this way.
What would be the next logical step in extending this study?
For the people who do have trust in AI, how much do they trust the science? For the people who do no trust the AI science, what would make them trust the science? So basically conduct another survey with the same population that was studied before to get a more in depth answer from them.
Hey Jordon,
I cannot view the article because it is not available to the public. I just wanted to clarify that the method of analysis the article must have used was Nominal data. Though you also mention percentages that could have ratio data. The article must have been an interesting read because the abstract gave an intriguing summary of the Taiwaneses’ perception of artificial intelligence. I thought you did well on your conclusion because you specified who believes in the news rather than trusting the Taiwanese government. I also thought you created an excellent question to extend this study. People may not trust AI science because the government in Taiwan may be perceived as corrupt. Providing another survey to the Taiwanese people about what would make them trust AI science would be an interesting study.
Hello jordan ,
I like the way you pose a question at end of the review “For the people who do have trust in AI, how much do they trust the science?” i would say Depends on what A.I. we’re talking about, and what kind of ‘trust’ we’re talking about.
For example, I would trust a well-tested self driving car more than a human driver to drive me around if it were shown that it is statistically less likely for it to get into accidents than human drivers. The same would go for robot-surgeons. If the numbers show robot surgeons are more accurate and safer than human surgeons, I would rather be operated by a robot.So, for narrow specific tasks and with enough evidence that the A.I. is safer than human, I would ‘trust’ the A.I. better than a human.
For more general things, I would tend to be more skeptic and would judge it in a case-by-case basis.
If we’re speaking of a sci-fi general-inteligence A.I. with super-human capabilities, I wouldn’t trust it because the risk would be too great if something went wrong. So I think it’s better to keep A.I. only for more narrow skills and specific tasks (different A.I.s for different tasks, and not one does-it-all A.I.).