Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study employs a conjoint survey experiment across seven countries to assess public preferences regarding AI regulation, revealing a strong citizen inclination towards prioritizing safety over innovation. The findings indicate a clear preference for public governance mechanisms over private self-regulation and favor international regulatory frameworks over national ones. Notably, individuals who perceive AI as risky and unpredictable exhibit the strongest support for these regulatory preferences, highlighting a significant disconnect between current regulatory practices and public sentiment.
Citizens overwhelmingly favor safety-focused AI regulation, challenging the prevailing emphasis on innovation and private governance.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming economies, societies, and polities, raising fundamental questions about how it should be regulated. Policymakers face choices over whether to prioritize innovation or safety, rely on public oversight or private self-regulation, and govern nationally or internationally. Yet little is known about how citizens evaluate these competing priorities. Here we report a conjoint survey experiment conducted in seven countries with diverse political and economic profiles. We find that citizens strongly support regulating AI and generally prioritize safety over innovation, public governance over private self-regulation, and international over national approaches. The preference for safety is strongest among those who perceive AI as risky, unpredictable, and personally consequential. These findings reveal a systematic misalignment between dominant regulatory approaches and citizen preferences.