A systematic literature review on risk perception of Artificial Narrow Intelligence

被引:1
作者
Krieger, Jonas Benjamin [1 ,6 ]
Bouder, Frederic [2 ]
Wibral, Matthias [3 ]
Almeida, Rui Jorge [4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] United Nations Univ UNU MERIT, Sch Business & Econ, Maastricht, Netherlands
[2] Univ Stavanger, Dept Safety Econ & Planning, Stavanger, Norway
[3] Univ Maastricht, Sch Business & Econ, Dept Microecon & Publ Econ, Maastricht, Netherlands
[4] Univ Maastricht, Sch Business & Econ, Dept Data Analyt & Digitalisat, Maastricht, Netherlands
[5] Univ Maastricht, Sch Business & Econ, Dept Quantitat Econometr, Maastricht, Netherlands
[6] Maastricht Univ, Maastricht Econ & Social Res Inst Innovat & Techno, unu MeriT, Boschstr 24, NL-6211 AX Maastricht, Netherlands
关键词
Risk Perception; Risk; Artificial Intelligence; AI; Artificial Narrow Intelligence; ANI; INFORMATION-TECHNOLOGY; GENDER-DIFFERENCES; PERCEIVED RISK; TRUST; ANTHROPOMORPHISM; ACCEPTANCE; KNOWLEDGE; ATTITUDES; SERVICES; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1080/13669877.2024.2350725
中图分类号
C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ;
摘要
The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has captured global attention recently, prompting the need to understand how associated risks are perceived. This paper attempts to fill this gap by providing a comprehensive overview of the topic, focusing especially on the most problematic area of Artificial Narrow Intelligence. Utilising a systematic literature review, we examined 64 studies focusing on both statistical and qualitative aspects of AI risk perceptions. This research shows that current publications focus on Asia and North America, with the number of publications increasing significantly over the last three years. Research focuses primarily on three domains: Health, consumer behaviour and finance. This study has identified key factors that influence AI risk perceptions, including familiarity, trust and privacy, while also recognising confounding variables such as gender and political orientation. Still, one crucial shortcoming in existing literature emerges: While numerous studies examine how AI risk perceptions are conceived, there is a lack of systematic research on the formation of these perceptions.
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 130 条
[21]   sCARy! Risk Perceptions in Autonomous Driving: The Influence of Experience on Perceived Benefits and Barriers [J].
Brell, Teresa ;
Philipsen, Ralf ;
Ziefle, Martina .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2019, 39 (02) :342-357
[22]   Elephants don't play chess [J].
Brooks, Rodney A. .
Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 1990, 6 (1-2) :3-15
[23]   The impact of gender on risk perception: Implications for EU member states' national risk assessment processes [J].
Brown, Gavin D. ;
Largey, Ann ;
McMullan, Caroline .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DISASTER RISK REDUCTION, 2021, 63
[24]   Rise of the machines: Delegating decisions to autonomous AI [J].
Candrian, Cindy ;
Scherer, Anne .
COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2022, 134
[25]   Conservatism predicts aversion to consequential Artificial Intelligence [J].
Castelo, Noah ;
Ward, Adrian F. .
PLOS ONE, 2021, 16 (12)
[26]  
Charniak E., 1985, INTRO ARTIFICIAL INT
[27]   Public Acceptance of Driverless Buses in China: An Empirical Analysis Based on an Extended UTAUT Model [J].
Chen, Jian ;
Li, Rui ;
Gan, Mi ;
Fu, Zhiyan ;
Yuan, Fatao .
DISCRETE DYNAMICS IN NATURE AND SOCIETY, 2020, 2020
[28]   How Do AI-driven Chatbots Impact User Experience? Examining Gratifications, Perceived Privacy Risk, Satisfaction, Loyalty, and Continued Use [J].
Cheng, Yang ;
Jiang, Hua .
JOURNAL OF BROADCASTING & ELECTRONIC MEDIA, 2020, 64 (04) :592-614
[29]   Factors influencing clinicians' willingness to use an AI-based clinical decision support system [J].
Choudhury, Avishek .
FRONTIERS IN DIGITAL HEALTH, 2022, 4
[30]   Systematic reviews: Synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions [J].
Cook, DJ ;
Mulrow, CD ;
Haynes, RB .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1997, 126 (05) :376-380