框架之争与公众对决策者的影响:来自美国人工智能政策讨论的证据

IF 5.7 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Daniel S Schiff
{"title":"框架之争与公众对决策者的影响:来自美国人工智能政策讨论的证据","authors":"Daniel S Schiff","doi":"10.1093/polsoc/puae007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As artificial intelligence (AI) policy has begun to take shape in recent years, policy actors have worked to influence policymakers by strategically promoting issue frames that define the problems and solutions policymakers should attend to. Three such issue frames are especially prominent, surrounding AI’s economic, geopolitical, and ethical dimensions. Relatedly, while technology policy is traditionally expert-dominated, new governance paradigms are encouraging increased public participation along with heightened attention to social and ethical dimensions of technology. This study aims to provide insight into whether members of the public and the issue frames they employ shape—or fail to shape—policymaker agendas, particularly for highly contested and technical policy domains. To assess this question, the study draws on a dataset of approximately five million Twitter messages from members of the public related to AI, as well as corresponding AI messages from the 115th and 116th US Congresses. After using text analysis techniques to identify the prevalence of issue frames, the study applies autoregressive integrated moving average and vector autoregression modeling to determine whether issue frames used by the public appear to influence the subsequent messaging used by federal US policymakers. Results indicate that the public does lead policymaker attention to AI generally. However, the public does not have a special role in shaping attention to ethical implications of AI, as public influence occurs only when the public discusses AI’s economic dimensions. Overall, the results suggest that calls for public engagement in AI policy may be underrealized and potentially circumscribed by strategic considerations.","PeriodicalId":47383,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Framing contestation and public influence on policymakers: evidence from US artificial intelligence policy discourse\",\"authors\":\"Daniel S Schiff\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/polsoc/puae007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As artificial intelligence (AI) policy has begun to take shape in recent years, policy actors have worked to influence policymakers by strategically promoting issue frames that define the problems and solutions policymakers should attend to. Three such issue frames are especially prominent, surrounding AI’s economic, geopolitical, and ethical dimensions. Relatedly, while technology policy is traditionally expert-dominated, new governance paradigms are encouraging increased public participation along with heightened attention to social and ethical dimensions of technology. This study aims to provide insight into whether members of the public and the issue frames they employ shape—or fail to shape—policymaker agendas, particularly for highly contested and technical policy domains. To assess this question, the study draws on a dataset of approximately five million Twitter messages from members of the public related to AI, as well as corresponding AI messages from the 115th and 116th US Congresses. After using text analysis techniques to identify the prevalence of issue frames, the study applies autoregressive integrated moving average and vector autoregression modeling to determine whether issue frames used by the public appear to influence the subsequent messaging used by federal US policymakers. Results indicate that the public does lead policymaker attention to AI generally. However, the public does not have a special role in shaping attention to ethical implications of AI, as public influence occurs only when the public discusses AI’s economic dimensions. Overall, the results suggest that calls for public engagement in AI policy may be underrealized and potentially circumscribed by strategic considerations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47383,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Policy and Society\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Policy and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puae007\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puae007","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,随着人工智能(AI)政策开始成形,政策制定者通过战略性地推广问题框架,确定政策制定者应关注的问题和解决方案,努力对政策制定者施加影响。其中,围绕人工智能的经济、地缘政治和伦理层面的三个问题框架尤为突出。与此相关的是,虽然技术政策传统上由专家主导,但新的治理模式正在鼓励更多的公众参与,同时加强对技术的社会和伦理层面的关注。本研究旨在深入探讨公众及其所使用的问题框架是否影响--或未能影响--决策者的议程,尤其是在争议较大的技术政策领域。为了评估这个问题,本研究利用了一个数据集,其中包含约 500 万条与人工智能有关的公众 Twitter 消息,以及第 115 届和第 116 届美国国会的相应人工智能消息。在使用文本分析技术确定问题框架的普遍性后,研究采用自回归综合移动平均和向量自回归模型来确定公众使用的问题框架是否会影响美国联邦决策者随后使用的信息。结果表明,总体而言,公众确实引导了决策者对人工智能的关注。然而,公众在引导人们关注人工智能的道德影响方面并没有发挥特殊作用,因为只有当公众讨论人工智能的经济层面时才会产生影响。总之,研究结果表明,要求公众参与人工智能政策的呼声可能没有得到充分实现,而且有可能受到战略考虑的限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Framing contestation and public influence on policymakers: evidence from US artificial intelligence policy discourse
As artificial intelligence (AI) policy has begun to take shape in recent years, policy actors have worked to influence policymakers by strategically promoting issue frames that define the problems and solutions policymakers should attend to. Three such issue frames are especially prominent, surrounding AI’s economic, geopolitical, and ethical dimensions. Relatedly, while technology policy is traditionally expert-dominated, new governance paradigms are encouraging increased public participation along with heightened attention to social and ethical dimensions of technology. This study aims to provide insight into whether members of the public and the issue frames they employ shape—or fail to shape—policymaker agendas, particularly for highly contested and technical policy domains. To assess this question, the study draws on a dataset of approximately five million Twitter messages from members of the public related to AI, as well as corresponding AI messages from the 115th and 116th US Congresses. After using text analysis techniques to identify the prevalence of issue frames, the study applies autoregressive integrated moving average and vector autoregression modeling to determine whether issue frames used by the public appear to influence the subsequent messaging used by federal US policymakers. Results indicate that the public does lead policymaker attention to AI generally. However, the public does not have a special role in shaping attention to ethical implications of AI, as public influence occurs only when the public discusses AI’s economic dimensions. Overall, the results suggest that calls for public engagement in AI policy may be underrealized and potentially circumscribed by strategic considerations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Policy and Society
Policy and Society Multiple-
CiteScore
18.00
自引率
6.50%
发文量
43
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍: Policy and Society is a prominent international open-access journal publishing peer-reviewed research on critical issues in policy theory and practice across local, national, and international levels. The journal seeks to comprehend the origin, functioning, and implications of policies within broader political, social, and economic contexts. It publishes themed issues regularly and, starting in 2023, will also feature non-themed individual submissions.
×
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