How generative artificial intelligence portrays science: Interviewing ChatGPT from the perspective of different audience segments.

IF 3.5 2区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Sophia Charlotte Volk, Mike S Schäfer, Damiano Lombardi, Daniela Mahl, Xiaoyue Yan
{"title":"How generative artificial intelligence portrays science: Interviewing ChatGPT from the perspective of different audience segments.","authors":"Sophia Charlotte Volk, Mike S Schäfer, Damiano Lombardi, Daniela Mahl, Xiaoyue Yan","doi":"10.1177/09636625241268910","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Generative artificial intelligence in general and ChatGPT in particular have risen in importance. ChatGPT is widely known and used increasingly as an information source for different topics, including science. It is therefore relevant to examine how ChatGPT portrays science and science-related issues. Research on this question is lacking, however. Hence, we simulate \"interviews\" with ChatGPT and reconstruct how it presents science, science communication, scientific misbehavior, and controversial scientific issues. Combining qualitative and quantitative content analysis, we find that, generally, ChatGPT portrays science largely as the STEM disciplines, in a positivist-empiricist way and a positive light. When comparing ChatGPT's responses to different simulated user profiles and responses from the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 versions, we find similarities in that the scientific consensus on questions such as climate change, COVID-19 vaccinations, or astrology is consistently conveyed across them. Beyond these similarities in substance, however, pronounced differences are found in the personalization of responses to different user profiles and between GPT-3.5 and GPT-4.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Understanding of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625241268910","RegionNum":2,"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

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence in general and ChatGPT in particular have risen in importance. ChatGPT is widely known and used increasingly as an information source for different topics, including science. It is therefore relevant to examine how ChatGPT portrays science and science-related issues. Research on this question is lacking, however. Hence, we simulate "interviews" with ChatGPT and reconstruct how it presents science, science communication, scientific misbehavior, and controversial scientific issues. Combining qualitative and quantitative content analysis, we find that, generally, ChatGPT portrays science largely as the STEM disciplines, in a positivist-empiricist way and a positive light. When comparing ChatGPT's responses to different simulated user profiles and responses from the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 versions, we find similarities in that the scientific consensus on questions such as climate change, COVID-19 vaccinations, or astrology is consistently conveyed across them. Beyond these similarities in substance, however, pronounced differences are found in the personalization of responses to different user profiles and between GPT-3.5 and GPT-4.

生成式人工智能如何描绘科学:从不同受众群体的角度采访 ChatGPT。
生成式人工智能,特别是 ChatGPT 的重要性日益凸显。ChatGPT 已广为人知,并越来越多地被用作包括科学在内的不同主题的信息来源。因此,研究 ChatGPT 如何描绘科学和与科学相关的问题具有重要意义。然而,关于这个问题的研究还很缺乏。因此,我们模拟了与 ChatGPT 的 "访谈",重构了它是如何介绍科学、科学传播、科学失范行为和有争议的科学问题的。结合定性和定量内容分析,我们发现,总体而言,ChatGPT 以实证主义-经验主义的方式和积极的态度将科学描述为 STEM 学科。在比较 ChatGPT 对不同模拟用户配置文件的回复以及 GPT-3.5 和 GPT-4 版本的回复时,我们发现它们有相似之处,即在气候变化、COVID-19 疫苗接种或占星术等问题上都一致传达了科学共识。然而,除了这些实质内容上的相似之处外,我们还发现了针对不同用户配置文件的个性化回复以及 GPT-3.5 和 GPT-4 之间的明显差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
9.80%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: Public Understanding of Science is a fully peer reviewed international journal covering all aspects of the inter-relationships between science (including technology and medicine) and the public. Public Understanding of Science is the only journal to cover all aspects of the inter-relationships between science (including technology and medicine) and the public. Topics Covered Include... ·surveys of public understanding and attitudes towards science and technology ·perceptions of science ·popular representations of science ·scientific and para-scientific belief systems ·science in schools
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信