PROVO – Regarding artificial intelligence, people have many reasons to use technology.
Whether it is optimizing work tasks, planning a busy week or simply offering a dinner recipe, AI is a tool that is undoubtedly there to stay.
But what about those who are more worried?
A new study From Brigham Young University noted that people who are reluctant to use AI are not necessarily in this way to fear that AI can replace their work or that Chatgpt will become a sensitive day and will take up the world.
For many, the reasons against the adoption of AI in their daily life are a little less insignificant and rooted in problems such as the confidence of the results, missing human touch or feeling uncertain if the generator is ethical to use.
“When people actively choose not to use something, there is often a lot of reflection or intention that goes,” said Jacob Steffen, professor of information systems at the Marriott School of Business, in a press release. “And with the rapid advancement of AI, it is important to understand why some people hesitate to adopt such technologies.”
Steffen co-wrote the study with his colleague Professor Taylor Wells and others using two different surveys. Respondents were asked to describe the situations where they chose not to use generator and to explain why.
These responses were used to develop the second survey, where participants evaluated the likelihood they would be to use or avoid generative AI in each situation. Participants also evaluated their concerns about factors such as ethical concerns and the risk of perceived use.
The four main concerns mentioned on the basis of the survey results were:
- Exit quality: fear that the exit generating AI will be inaccurate or unreliable
- Ethical implications: Fear that the generator is illegal, dishonest or immoral
- Risk: fear that generating AI will be dangerous and use private data
- Human connection: the fear that the interaction with the generating AI is artificial and lack of interactionary advantages
These results also reflect larger studies with results From the Pew Research Center published in April who said that 66% of adults and 70% of AI experts are “very concerned” at the idea that people get inaccurate information from AI.
Regarding human connection, Pew’s conclusions were more divided between the public and the IA experts, 57% of the public concerning AI leading to less human connection, as opposed to 37% of experts.
The concerns cited in the study of Byu presented themselves in situations such as the use of the generator for school works, the drafting of poems or the art taking, the search for financial or medical advice, the development of praise or sincere messages and to make important life decisions.
Despite its positive use in education, Wells said that AI can sometimes be a crutch to replace real learning.
“If you use Genai for all your missions, you can do your job quickly, but you haven’t learned at all,” Wells said in a press release. “What is your value as a graduate if you have just unloaded all your intellectual work to a machine?”
Steffen compared the generative AI to a hammer in this case is useful in the right context, but sometimes not necessary or even counterproductive in others.
However, Steffen added that he hoped that this research will help people to make more informed choices at the time and the offer of AI is the right tool for work and understanding the promotion between generating AIrs and hesitant non-users.
“It is important to understand your goal behind the creation of something,” said Steffen. “Is it to learn? Is it something quickly? You present something like your own work, or as a gift to someone else? These questions can help us decide when using AI.”
The main dishes to remember from this article were generated with the help of large languages models and examined by our editorial team. The article, itself, is only written by man.
