Pular para o conteúdo principal

ETHNOS_APP

Início • Busca • Periódicos • Lista 0

Me, myself and AI

How gender, personality and emotions determine willingness to use Strong AI for self-improvement

Dados Bibliográficos

ID21401344
AutoresSabrina Renz (Seeburg Castle University, autor correspondente), Jeanette Kalimeris (0009-0005-0819-2371, Seeburg Castle University), Sebastian Hofreiter (0000-0002-5008-5239, University of Applied Management), Matthias Spörrle (Seeburg Castle University)
Ano2024
Volume209
Páginas123760
Data de publicação2024-12-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoTechnological Forecasting and Social Change (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0040-1625 • E-ISSN: 1873-5509
EditoraElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123760
OpenAlexW4402780634
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas10
Referências citadas72

With current technological advancements in AI pushing the boundaries of human-level capabilities, using general human-level artificial intelligence (i.e., Strong AI) holds potential for substantially improving human cognitive abilities. We examine individual-level antecedents of willingness to use Strong AI for improving human cognitive abilities. Two quantitative studies ( N 1 = 1446, N 2 = 1090) reveal that gender and emotions have significant effects on the intention to use Strong AI for cognitive self-enhancement. Male (compared to female) participants demonstrate a higher willingness to use Strong AI for self-improvement. This difference can be explained partly by negative and independently by positive emotional reactions toward Strong AI. Neuroticism moderates the indirect effect via negative emotional reactions, such that sex differences in negative emotions diminish with higher levels of neuroticism. Our research findings provide first empirical evidence for demographic asymmetries regarding adoption intentions of Strong AI for cognitive self-improvement. We emphasize the importance of addressing sex differences through the management of positive as well as negative emotional responses and personality dispositions when designing equitable strategies for implementing Strong AI within our societies. • We examined individual-level predictors of using Strong AI for cognitive self-improvement. • Females reported lower willingness to use Strong AI than men. • Positive together with negative emotional responses toward Strong AI partially explained this difference. • With increasing levels of neuroticism gender differences decreased. • Society should address gender, personality differences and emotional responses to promote Strong AI adoption

Cognitive psychology · Epistemology · Personality · Reflexive pronoun · AI in Service Interactions · Behavioral Health and Interventions · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI · Philosophy · Psychology · Social Psychology

  • Psychological and technological predictors of AI literacy profiles

    Open Access•Yuanyuan Zhang, Bochun Kang•BMC Psychology•2026

  • Social Robotic Surveillance and Manipulation

    Minja Axelsson, Hannele Seeck•ACM Transactions on Human-Robot…•2026

  • When trust collides

    Open Access•Guanxuan Jiang, Shirao Yang et al.•International Journal of…•2026

  • Impact of integrating generative AI into consumer-generated advertising campaigns on creators’ brand relationship quality

    Yufan Jian, Jinting Xi et al.•International Journal of…•2026

  • On the relevance of Maslow's need theory in the age of artificial intelligence

    Open Access•C Montag, A Mehdi Riazi et al.•Technological Forecasting and…•2025

  • Sensemaking and AI

    Open Access•Domenico di Prisco, Silvia Dello Russo•Technological Forecasting and…•2026

  • AI-transforming EFL learning

    Open Access•Xiaolan Wen, Dan Jin•Humanities and Social Sciences…•2026

  • Gender differences in creative workers’ general attitudes toward artificial intelligence painting tools

    Open Access•Liu Yuanxia•AI & Society•2026

  • Too old for risk? Enhancing effects between risk assessment and age on the perceived usefulness of cyborg technologies

    Open Access•Carmen Tamara Bassler, Patrick Reichel et al.•Acta Psychologica•2025

  • Examining the impediments to AI chatbots adoption among professional practitioners

    Open Access•Alaa Amin Abdalla, Chandan Kumar Tiwari et al.•Acta Psychologica•2025

  • A First Course in Factor Analysis

    Andrew L Comrey, Howard B Lee•First Course in Factor Analysis•2013

  • Adoption and use of AI tools

    Open Access•Vivek Venkatesh, Viswanath Venkatesh•Annals of Operations Research•2022

  • Siri, Siri, in my hand

    Open Access•Andreas Kaplan, Abhi Bhattacharya et al.•Business Horizons•2019

  • Gender Differences in Personality across the Ten Aspects of the Big Five

    Open Access•Yanna J Weisberg, Colin G Deyoung et al.•Frontiers in Psychology•2011

  • The influence of technology anxiety on consumer use and experiences with self-service technologies

    Open Access•Matthew L Meuter, Amy L Ostrom et al.•Journal of Business Research•2003

  • The General Attitudes towards Artificial Intelligence Scale (Gaais)

    Open Access•Astrid Schepman, Paul Rodway•International Journal of…•2023

  • The Panas-X

    David Watson, Lesley A Clark et al.•University of Iowa•1994

  • Assessing the Attitude Towards Artificial Intelligence

    Open Access•Cornelia Sindermann, Peng Sha et al.•KI - Künstliche Intelligenz•2021

  • A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non‐normal Likert variables

    Open Access•Bengt Muthén, D M Kaplan et al.•British Journal of Mathematical…•1985

  • A Rationale and Test for the Number of Factors in Factor Analysis

    Open Access•John L Horn•Psychometrika•1965

  • Minds, brains, and programs

    Open Access•John R Searle•Behavioral and Brain Sciences•1980

  • User Acceptance of Information Technology

    Viswanath Venkatesh, Venkatesh Venkatesh et al.•MIS Quarterly•2003

  • Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models

    Open Access•Kristopher J Preacher, Andrew F Hayes•Behavior Research Methods•2008

  • Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on How to Control It

    Philip M Podsakoff, Scott B Mackenzie et al.•Annual Review of Psychology•2012

  • A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model

    Open Access•Vivek Venkatesh, Viswanath Venkatesh et al.•Management Science•2000

  • Evaluating Effect Size in Psychological Research

    Open Access•David C Funder, Daniel J Ozer•Advances in Methods and Practices…•2019

  • Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions

    Open Access•Vivek Venkatesh, Viswanath Venkatesh et al.•Decision Sciences•2008

  • Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology

    Fred D Davis•MIS Quarterly•1989

  • Sample size in factor analysis.

    Robert C Maccallum, Keith F Widaman et al.•Psychological Methods•1999

  • Self-Reports in Organizational Research

    Open Access•Philip M Podsakoff, Dennis W Organ•Journal of Management•1986

  • Approximate and Situated Causality in Deep Learning

    Open Access•Jordi Vallverdú•Philosophies•2020

  • Not All Effects Are Indispensable

    Open Access•Farid Anvari, Rogier Kievit et al.•Perspectives on Psychological…•2023

  • Cognitive Enhancement

    Open Access•E Racine, B A Zolotar et al.•Science and Engineering Ethics•2021

  • Emotions toward cognitive enhancement technologies and the body – Attitudes and willingness to use

    Open Access•Rebekah Rousi, Roni Renko•International Journal of…•2020

  • Personality traits and psychological well-being as moderators of the relationship between stressors and negative affect

    Open Access•Mohsen Joshanloo•Current Psychology•2023

  • Artificial Intelligence and Human Enhancement

    Open Access•Sven Nyholm•Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare…•2024

  • Intention to use robotic exoskeletons by older people

    Open Access•Ke Chen, Vivian W Q Lou et al.•Computers in Human Behavior•2023

  • Attachment and trust in artificial intelligence

    Open Access•Omri Gillath, Ting Ai et al.•Computers in Human Behavior•2021

  • From wearable to insideable

    Open Access•Olarte-Pascual Cristina, Pelegrín-Borondo Jorge et al.•Computers in Human Behavior•2021

  • Determinants of the intention to use non-medical insertable digital devices

    Open Access•Guiovanna Sabogal-Alfaro, Guiovanna Paola Sabogal-Alfaro et al.•Telematics and Informatics•2021

  • My perfectionism drives me to be a cyborg

    Ashraf Sadat Ahadzadeh, Shin Ling Wu et al.•Behaviour and Information…•2024

  • To trust or not to trust? An assessment of trust in AI-based systems

    Open Access•Nessrine Omrani, Giorgia Rivieccio et al.•Technological Forecasting and…•2022

  • Technology roadmap of AI applications in the retail industry

    Open Access•Hsi‐Peng Lu, Hsi-Peng Lu et al.•Technological Forecasting and…•2023

  • Emotions and consumers’ adoption of innovations

    Open Access•Carmen Valor, Paolo Antonetti et al.•Technological Forecasting and…•2022

  • The AI-extended consumer

    Open Access•Björn Frank, Boris Herbas-Torrico et al.•Technological Forecasting and…•2021

  • How AI revolutionizes innovation management – Perceptions and implementation preferences of AI-based innovators

    Open Access•John Fuller, Johann Füller et al.•Technological Forecasting and…•2022

  • Unlocking society's standings in artificial intelligence

    Open Access•Anna-Мaria Kanzola, Anna-Maria Kanzola et al.•Technological Forecasting and…•2024

  • Who Likes Artificial Intelligence? Personality Predictors of Attitudes toward Artificial Intelligence

    Jiyoung Park, Sang Eun Woo•The Journal of Psychology•2022

  • Gendered AI

    Open Access•Tanja Carstensen, Kathrin Ganz•AI & Society•2025

  • The Application of Electronic Computers to Factor Analysis

    Open Access•Henry F Kaiser•Educational and Psychological…•1960

  • Gender and attitudes toward technology use

    Open Access•Zhihui Cai, Xitao Fan et al.•Computers & Education•2016

  • The Threat of Algocracy

    Open Access•John Danaher•Philosophy & Technology•2016

  • Personality Influences in Appraisal-Emotion Relationships

    Open Access•Eddie M W Tong•Journal of Personality•2010

  • An Examination of Hardiness and Neuroticism as Potential Moderators of Stress Outcomes

    Holly A Hills, Holly Hills et al.•Behavioral Medicine•1991

  • Gender-role orientation and body image in women and men

    Open Access•Caroline Davis, Michelle Dionne et al.•Sex Roles•1996

  • The influence of ethical judgements on acceptance and non-acceptance of wearables and insideables

    Open Access•Jorge De Andrés-Sánchez, Mario Arias-Oliva et al.•Technology in Society•2021

  • A new acceptance model for artificial intelligence with extensions to UTAUT2

    Open Access•Oliver Alexander Gansser, Oliver Gansser et al.•Technology in Society•2021

  • I've got you under my skin’ – The role of ethical consideration in the (non-) acceptance of insideables in the workplace

    Open Access•Stéphanie Gauttier•Technology in Society•2019

  • Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior

    R J Hill, Martin Fishbein et al.•Contemporary Sociology A Journal…•1977

  • International comparison of gender differences in the five-factor model of personality

    Open Access•Sara Murphy, Sara A Murphy et al.•Journal of Research in Personality•2021

  • Treatments approved, boosts eschewed

    Open Access•Mika Koverola, Anton Kunnari et al.•Journal of Experimental Social…•2022

  • Why can't a man be more like a woman? Sex differences in Big Five personality traits across 55 cultures

    D P Schmitt, Anu Realo et al.•Journal of Personality and Social…•2008

  • Exploratory Factor Analysis

    Open Access•Marley W Watkins•Journal of Black Psychology•2018

Obras citantes distintas10
Citações por ano10
Intervalo de citações2025 - 2026 (2)
Velocidade de citaçãocurrent
Altamente citadoNão
Tipos de citaçãoNeutras: 10
Ethnos_APP • Projeto Open Source • Licença MIT • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacidade e Cookies • Documentação da API: api.ethnos.app/docs • Código da API: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Código do Frontend: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae