AI and Human Enhancement: Americans’ Openness Is Tempered by a Range of Concerns
Partisans differ in their concerns about government regulation of technologies for AI, human enhancement
Embed
Attachment Info
- AI and Human Enhancement: Americans’ Openness Is Tempered by a Range of Concerns
- Majority says brain chip implants for improved cognitive abilities would be bad idea for society; public more open to other applications of human enhancement and AI
- Majorities think higher standards should be used in testing the safety of some developing technologies, not just existing standards
- Public not convinced that certain physical and cognitive enhancements would lead to clear improvements in people’s lives … And some are skeptical that several AI applications would have a positive impact
- Across AI and human enhancement applications, public sees mitigating steps that would make their use more acceptable
- Americans lean toward concern over excitement when it comes to the increased use of AI in daily life … And public views are varied when it comes to three specific AI applications
- Americans explain in their own words what makes them either more concerned or more excited about the increased presence of AI in daily life
- Americans are concerned about AI systems that could know people’s thoughts and make important life decisions for them
- Older adults and women are more likely than others to express at least some concern about some possible AI developments
- Whose experiences and views are taken into account when AI programs are designed? Views vary depending on the demographic group in question
- Public is divided on whether AI programs can be designed to make fair decisions consistently
- Plurality of Americans think widespread use of facial recognition by police would be a good idea
- Widespread use of facial recognition technology by police seen more negatively by younger adults, those who have hear a lot about the topic
- 57% of Americans say the widespread use of facial recognition technology by police won’t change crime rates in the U.S.
- Majorities believe facial recognition would help find missing persons, solve crimes but also think it would be used to surveil Black, Hispanic neighborhoods
- 48% of Black adults say police definitely would use facial recognition to monitor Black, Hispanic neighborhoods more often than other neighborhoods
- 60% of Americans say people should assume they are being monitored in public
- Black adults less likely than Hispanic and White counterparts to say facial recognition will make policing fairer
- Majority of Americans don’t think facial recognition technology should be good enough evidence for arrest
- About six-in-ten say it’s acceptable for police to use facial recognition to monitor crowds, but 68% are not OK with scanning people walking down the street
- A majority of Americans say use of facial recognition software by police would be more acceptable if cops were trained in how these tools can make errors
- About half say police departments, federal agencies should play a major role in setting standards for police use of facial recognition technology
- Similar shares say government will go too far or not far enough regulating police’s facial recognition use, but this varies by party
- Roughly half of Americans favor use of facial recognition in retail stores and apartment buildings, they view other uses less favorably
- Mixed views about whether social media firms’ use of algorithms to find false information is a good idea or not
- About three-quarters of social media users say they have seen information flagged or labeled as false on the sites
- Seven-in-ten Americans say political viewpoints are being censored due to social media companies’ widespread use of algorithms to find false information
- Majorities in both parties say social media companies using algorithms to find false information is leading to censorship, but Republicans far more likely to say so
- Republicans more likely than Democrats to say social media companies’ widespread use of algorithms for finding false information is a bad idea for society
- Only one-in-ten adults think people have a lot of control over what they see on social media
- Majority say social media companies should use a mix of people, algorithms to decide what’s false on their sites … And about a third aren’t sure if people or algorithms do a better job
- Majorities say including people of various backgrounds is important when developing programs to detect false information on social media; those who have heard at least a little about these algorithms are particularly likely to say so
- About seven-in-ten say social media companies should prioritize accuracy over speed when using algorithms to find false information on their sites
- 51% say social media companies should play a major role in setting standards for use of algorithms to find false information; 40% say federal agencies should
- 53% say their greater concern is that government will not go far enough regulating social media companies’ use of algorithms aimed at false information
- Majorities across parties not confident in social media firms to use algorithms aimed at false information appropriately, but Republicans stand out
- Americans resist deferring to algorithms on key decisions, particularly for medical treatments
- Hispanic or Black adults more likely than White adults to favor using algorithms to make final decisions for job interviews, parole, medical treatments
- Americans more likely to say the widespread use of driverless cars would be bad rather than good for society
- Majority of Americans say they wouldn’t want to ride in a driverless vehicle, but men, adults under 50 and those with a college degree are more open to the idea
- About one-in-five Americans say they’d be extremely or very comfortable sharing the road with driverless cars
- Men, younger adults and those who have heard a lot about driverless cars more likely to say they would be good for society
- Most say the widespread use of driverless cars would result in job loss, system hacking; still, a majority sees benefits for older adults, those with disabilities
- Fewer than one-in-ten adults say driverless vehicles will decrease income gaps among Americans
- Americans somewhat divided on impact of driverless vehicles on injuries, deaths from traffic accidents
- Public more likely to prioritize saving those inside rather than outside of a driverless car, but many are unsure
- Strong public support for driverless cars to have higher testing standards than regular vehicles
- A majority of Americans say companies that design driverless cars should play a major role in setting standards for them
- A slight majority of Americans are concerned that the government won’t go far enough in regulating driverless cars, but views are highly partisan
- Driverless cars seen as more acceptable if there were regular reports on accidents, cars clearly labeled
1615 L St. NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20036
USA
(+1) 202-419-4300 | Main
(+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax
(+1) 202-419-4372 | Media Inquiries
Research Topics
ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts.
Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center