A Study Shows Today’s AI Risks are Scarier Than Doomsday Predictions

Most people are more concerned about the immediate risks of artificial intelligence than distant, theoretical threats to humanity’s survival. A new study from the University of Zurich shows that respondents clearly differentiate between abstract future risks and specific, tangible issues, giving more weight to the latter.

While there’s widespread agreement that AI presents significant risks, people differ in how they view and prioritize these dangers. Some emphasize long-term, speculative risks like AI threatening human existence, while others focus on pressing real-world issues, such as AI amplifying social biases and spreading disinformation.

Experts caution that an overemphasis on dramatic “existential risks” might shift attention away from the urgent, concrete problems AI is already causing.

Exploring Public Perception: A Study on AI Risks and Benefits

A group of political scientists at the University of Zurich conducted three online experiments with over 10,000 participants from the USA and UK, exposing them to different AI framings: catastrophic risks, current threats like discrimination and misinformation, or potential benefits.The goal was to assess whether warnings about a distant, future AI catastrophe reduce awareness of real, present-day issues.

Current AI Risks Spark Greater Concern Than Future Catastrophes, Study Finds

“Our findings indicate that respondents are far more concerned about the current risks of AI than about potential future catastrophes,” says Professor Fabrizio Gilardi from the Department of Political Science at UZH.

Even when texts highlighting existential threats heightened fears about such scenarios, concerns about present issues—such as AI-driven bias and job displacement—remained more prominent. The study also reveals that people are able to differentiate between theoretical dangers and concrete problems, taking both seriously.

Filling the Knowledge Gap: Current AI Threats Remain a Top Concern Despite Future Scenarios

The study addresses a key gap in understanding. Public discussions often express concerns that focusing on sensational future scenarios diverts attention from urgent present issues. This study is the first to provide systematic data showing that awareness of current threats remains strong even when people are confronted with apocalyptic warnings.

“Our study demonstrates that discussions about long-term risks don’t necessarily undermine attention to immediate problems,” says co-author Emma Hoes. Gilardi emphasizes, “The public discourse shouldn’t be framed as an ‘either-or’ situation. We need a balanced approach that recognizes both current and potential future challenges.”

Read the original article on: Scitech Daily

Read more:Artificial Intelligence Gains Ground in Agribusiness, New Survey Shows