People devalue generative AI’s competence but not its advice in addressing societal and personal challenges

ROBERT M. BOHM · Moritz Jörling · Leonhard Reiter · Christoph Fuchs

53 citations0/0 files storedCommunications Psychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Ethics and Social Impacts of AI Social Robot Interaction and HRI AI in Service Interactions

Abstract

The release of ChatGPT and related tools have made generative artificial intelligence (AI) easily accessible for the broader public. We conducted four preregistered experimental studies (total N = 3308; participants from the US) to investigate people's perceptions of generative AI and the advice it generates on how to address societal and personal challenges. The results indicate that when individuals are (vs. are not) aware that the advice was generated by AI, they devalue the author's competence but not the content or the intention to share and follow the advice on how to address societal challenges (Study 1) and personal challenges (Studies 2a and 2b). Study 3 further shows that individuals' preference to receive advice from AI (vs. human experts) increases when they gained positive experience with generative AI advice in the past. The results are discussed regarding the nature of AI aversion in the context of generative AI and beyond.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 53 citations exist upstream.

References

2003User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View1 2019Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment 2023Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers 2006Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences 2019A systematic review of algorithm aversion in augmented decision making 2021Algorithmic bias: review, synthesis, and future research directions 2021What influences algorithmic decision-making? A systematic literature review on algorithm aversion 2020Artificial intelligence versus Maya Angelou: Experimental evidence that people cannot differentiate AI-generated from human-written poetry

Cited by

2025Third-party evaluators perceive AI as more compassionate than expert humans 2024The Role of AI Self-Efficacy in Religious Contexts in Public Sector: The Social Cognitive Theory Perspective 2024Understanding and Perception of Automated Text Generation among the Public: Two Surveys with Representative Samples in Germany 2024People have different expectations for their own versus others' use of AI‐mediated communication tools

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.