Surveying Public Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care in the United States: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: This paper reviews nationally representative public opinion surveys on artificial intelligence (AI) in the United States, with a focus on areas related to health care. The potential health applications of AI continue to gain attention owing to their promise as well as challenges. For AI to fulfill its potential, it must not only be adopted by physicians and health providers but also by patients and other members of the public. OBJECTIVE: This study reviews the existing survey research on the United States' public attitudes toward AI in health care and reveals the challenges and opportunities for more effective and inclusive engagement on the use of AI in health settings. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of public opinion surveys, reports, and peer-reviewed journal articles published on Web of Science, PubMed, and Roper iPoll between January 2010 and January 2022. We include studies that are nationally representative US public opinion surveys and include at least one or more questions about attitudes toward AI in health care contexts. Two members of the research team independently screened the included studies. The reviewers screened study titles, abstracts, and methods for Web of Science and PubMed search results. For the Roper iPoll search results, individual survey items were assessed for relevance to the AI health focus, and survey details were screened to determine a nationally representative US sample. We reported the descriptive statistics available for the relevant survey questions. In addition, we performed secondary analyses on 4 data sets to further explore the findings on attitudes across different demographic groups. RESULTS: This review includes 11 nationally representative surveys. The search identified 175 records, 39 of which were assessed for inclusion. Surveys include questions related to familiarity and experience with AI; applications, benefits, and risks of AI in health care settings; the use of AI in disease diagnosis, treatment, and robotic caregiving; and related issues of data privacy and surveillance. Although most Americans have heard of AI, they are less aware of its specific health applications. Americans anticipate that medicine is likely to benefit from advances in AI; however, the anticipated benefits vary depending on the type of application. Specific application goals, such as disease prediction, diagnosis, and treatment, matter for the attitudes toward AI in health care among Americans. Most Americans reported wanting control over their personal health data. The willingness to share personal health information largely depends on the institutional actor collecting the data and the intended use. CONCLUSIONS: Americans in general report seeing health care as an area in which AI applications could be particularly beneficial. However, they have substantial levels of concern regarding specific applications, especially those in which AI is involved in decision-making and regarding the privacy of health information.

Strategic science communication in the age of politicization.

This chapter provides an overview of strategic communication concepts and frameworks that support scientists' communication and engagement efforts. While this chapter provides a synthesis of the research in these different areas of science communication and how the life sciences and medical science can leverage particularly insights, communicating science in an age of politicization requires a reflection not just at what drives differences in how the public thinks about the sciences and scientists, but also insights into our shared thoughts and feelings about science. To that end, the chapter concludes with a broader examination of the connection between science and society through an overview of new and innovative research on how both scientists and the public think and feel about science and the sciences more specifically. Connecting these different frameworks and concepts provides important directions for the life science community to consider in their specific communication and engagement efforts, and those of the scientific community more broadly.

Exploring scholars' public engagement goals in Canada and the United States.

We have little systematic knowledge about scholars' goals for public engagement in the academic literature. This study therefore provides a secondary analysis of two surveys of scholars that included closed-ended questions about goals. One survey from 2017 was from a sample of Canadian grant recipients from a federal science funding agency, while the second survey from 2018 comes from a sample of professors at top American research universities. The focus of this research is on both presenting novel data about scholars' expressed goals and exploring the relationships between these goals and potential predictors of these goals, including demographics, past engagement behavior, and overall views about public engagement. Areas for future research are then described.

Climate change, cultural cognition, and media effects: Worldviews drive news selectivity, biased processing, and polarized attitudes.

According to cultural cognition theory, individuals hold opinions about politically contested issues like climate change that are consistent with their "cultural way of life," conforming their opinions to how they think society should be organized and to what they perceive are the attitudes of their cultural peers. Yet despite dozens of cultural cognition studies, none have directly examined the role of the news media in facilitating these differential interpretations. To address this gap, drawing on a national survey of US adults administered in 2015, we statistically modeled the cultural cognition process in relation to news choices and media effects on public attitudes about climate change. Individuals possessing strongly held cultural worldviews, our findings show, not only choose news outlets where they expect to find culturally congruent arguments about climate change, but they also selectively process the arguments they encounter. Overall, our study demonstrates the substantial role that cultural cognition in combination with news media choices play in contributing to opinion polarization on climate change and other politicized science topics.

Tracking the release of IPCC AR5 on Twitter: Users, comments, and sources following the release of the Working Group I Summary for Policymakers.

Using the immediate release of the Working Group 1 Summary for Policymakers of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report as a case study, this article seeks to describe what type of actors were most active during the summary release, the substance of the most propagated tweets during the summary release, and the media sources that attracted the most attention during the summary release. The results from the study suggest that non-elite actors, such as individual bloggers and concerned citizens, accounted for the majority of the most propagated tweets in the sample. This study also finds that the majority of the most propagated tweets in the sample focused on public understanding of the report. Finally, while mainstream media sources were the most frequently discussed media sources, a number of new media and science news and information sources compete for audience attention.