AI, respectively Artificial intelligencehas never been more present in everyday life, but at the same time, it has never caused so much mistrust among citizens.
A new study by the Pew Research Center shows that the United States is in the midst of an interesting paradox. Although more and more people are regularly using AI tools like ChatGPTGemini and Copilot, most Americans still believe that the long-term impact of this technology on society will be negative.
The most striking data of the research is that only 16% of respondents believe that artificial intelligence will have a positive impact on society in the next 20 years. In contrast, 40% expect negative consequences, while 31% believe that the effects will be equally positive and negative. The results are particularly interesting when compared to actual user habits.
Nearly half of American adults use AI chatbots today, which is a big increase over last year. As many as 24% of respondents state that they use AI daily, while ChatGPT is by far the most popular service with 44% of users. They are followed by Google Gemini with 24%, Microsoft Copilot with 17%, Meta AI with 14%, Grok with 8% and Claude with 6%.
In other words, AI is becoming an integral part of everyday life, but this does not mean that trust in technology is also growing.
On the contrary, as many as 63% of Americans believe that the development of artificial intelligence is proceeding too quickly. At the same time, 67% do not trust that the US government will manage to effectively regulate this area, while 59% do not trust companies that develop AI systems to do so responsibly and safely.
Another interesting conclusion of the research is that younger users, who use AI the most, are among the biggest skeptics.
As many as 66% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 use chatbots, but only 14% of them believe that AI will have a positive impact on society. Almost half of respondents from this age group expect negative consequences of technology development. This contradicts the common belief that younger generations automatically have a more positive attitude towards new technologies. At the same time, research shows that users also recognize concrete benefits of AI tools.
About 30% of respondents believe that chatbots increase their productivity, while 28% say that they help them to be better informed. In other words, many see the practical value of artificial intelligence even if they are not optimistic about its long-term impact on society. Such a discrepancy is not accidental.
For the past year, the public has been exposed daily to news about AI models that are changing the way of work in programming, education, medicine and creative industries. At the same time, there is more and more talk about the loss of jobs, the spread of misinformation, the misuse of copyrighted works, the violation of privacy and the increasing concentration of power in the hands of a few large technology companies.
A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found that more than half of Americans fear that AI could threaten their jobs or someone in their household, further explaining the public’s wary attitude toward the technology. However, the fact that the use of AI tools continues to grow rapidly shows that skepticism does not mean rejecting the technology.
Many users clearly distinguish between personal benefit and social consequences. AI can help them finish work faster, find information or write a text, but this does not mean that they believe that the same technology will bring more benefits than problems to the whole society in the long run.
It is precisely this paradox that perhaps best describes the current stage of artificial intelligence development. Unlike the first years after the appearance of ChatGPT, when enthusiasm and curiosity dominated, the public today views AI much more pragmatically. Technology is being used more and more, but confidence in its long-term consequences is not growing at the same pace.
For companies investing billions of dollars in the development of AI systems, this could be one of the biggest challenges in the coming years. It is not enough to make a more powerful model – it will be necessary to convince the public that its increasing presence will really improve society, and not just increase the productivity of individuals.