Public acceptance of various ways to use and treat AI: A predictive moral framework

Kimmo Eriksson , Simon Karlsson , Irina Vartanova , Pontus Strimling
{"title":"Public acceptance of various ways to use and treat AI: A predictive moral framework","authors":"Kimmo Eriksson ,&nbsp;Simon Karlsson ,&nbsp;Irina Vartanova ,&nbsp;Pontus Strimling","doi":"10.1016/j.chbah.2026.100257","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As artificial intelligence rapidly transforms society, understanding the psychological principles that drive public acceptance or resistance is a critical challenge. Our study (U.S. sample, N = 589) of 100 diverse AI applications, both personal and organizational, demonstrates these moral judgments are highly predictable. We show that public perceptions of five relatively independent core qualities—risk, benefit, dishonesty, unnaturalness, and accountability—predict 91.4% of the variance in an application's acceptability. Notably, all five qualities contributed to predictive accuracy. Our framework also explains a profound contradiction in public attitudes toward AI treatment: people strongly reject deceiving or forcing AI systems—as if granting them rights—yet readily accept their termination. We show this is not an inconsistent attribution of AI's status, but a consistent moral evaluation of human actions: deception and coercion are rejected as intrinsically flawed behaviors, while termination is accepted as a legitimate exercise of control. Furthermore, we identify a key psychological mechanism for attitude change: personal experience with an AI application predicts higher acceptance by improving perceptions of its moral qualities. In sum, our research reveals the structured moral psychology that governs AI acceptance, providing a powerful framework for understanding human-AI interaction and guiding responsible innovation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100324,"journal":{"name":"Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans","volume":"7 ","pages":"Article 100257"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949882126000083","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As artificial intelligence rapidly transforms society, understanding the psychological principles that drive public acceptance or resistance is a critical challenge. Our study (U.S. sample, N = 589) of 100 diverse AI applications, both personal and organizational, demonstrates these moral judgments are highly predictable. We show that public perceptions of five relatively independent core qualities—risk, benefit, dishonesty, unnaturalness, and accountability—predict 91.4% of the variance in an application's acceptability. Notably, all five qualities contributed to predictive accuracy. Our framework also explains a profound contradiction in public attitudes toward AI treatment: people strongly reject deceiving or forcing AI systems—as if granting them rights—yet readily accept their termination. We show this is not an inconsistent attribution of AI's status, but a consistent moral evaluation of human actions: deception and coercion are rejected as intrinsically flawed behaviors, while termination is accepted as a legitimate exercise of control. Furthermore, we identify a key psychological mechanism for attitude change: personal experience with an AI application predicts higher acceptance by improving perceptions of its moral qualities. In sum, our research reveals the structured moral psychology that governs AI acceptance, providing a powerful framework for understanding human-AI interaction and guiding responsible innovation.
公众对使用和对待人工智能的各种方式的接受:预测性道德框架
随着人工智能迅速改变社会,理解驱动公众接受或抵制的心理原理是一项关键挑战。我们对100种不同的人工智能应用(包括个人和组织)的研究(美国样本,N = 589)表明,这些道德判断是高度可预测的。我们表明,公众对五个相对独立的核心品质——风险、利益、不诚实、不自然和问责——的看法预测了申请可接受性的91.4%的差异。值得注意的是,这五种品质都有助于预测的准确性。我们的框架也解释了公众对待人工智能态度上的一个深刻矛盾:人们强烈反对欺骗或强迫人工智能系统——就好像授予它们权利一样——但却欣然接受它们的终止。我们表明,这并不是对人工智能地位的不一致的归因,而是对人类行为的一致的道德评价:欺骗和强迫被视为本质上有缺陷的行为而被拒绝,而终止被接受为合法的控制。此外,我们确定了态度改变的关键心理机制:使用人工智能应用程序的个人经验可以通过提高对其道德品质的认知来预测更高的接受度。总之,我们的研究揭示了控制人工智能接受的结构化道德心理,为理解人类与人工智能的互动和指导负责任的创新提供了一个强大的框架。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书