SAT: a methodology to assess the social acceptance of innovative AI-based technologies

Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 1 (In press) (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present the conceptual model of an innovative methodology (SAT) to assess the social acceptance of technology, especially focusing on artificial intelligence (AI)-based technology. Design/methodology/approach After a review of the literature, this paper presents the main lines by which SAT stands out from current methods, namely, a four-bubble approach and a mix of qualitative and quantitative techniques that offer assessments that look at technology as a socio-technical system. Each bubble determines the social variability of a cluster of values: User-Experience Acceptance, Social Disruptiveness, Value Impact and Trust. Findings The methodology is still in development, requiring further developments, specifications and validation. Accordingly, the findings of this paper refer to the realm of the research discussion, that is, highlighting the importance of preventively assessing and forecasting the acceptance of technology and building the best design strategies to boost sustainable and ethical technology adoption. Social implications Once SAT method will be validated, it could constitute a useful tool, with societal implications, for helping users, markets and institutions to appraise and determine the co-implications of technology and socio-cultural contexts. Originality/value New AI applications flood today’s users and markets, often without a clear understanding of risks and impacts. In the European context, regulations (EU AI Act) and rules (EU Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy) try to fill this normative gap. The SAT method seeks to integrate the risk-based assessment of AI with an assessment of the perceptive-psychological and socio-behavioural aspects of its social acceptability.

Similar books and articles

Understanding Institutions without Collective Acceptance?Pekka Mäkelä, Raul Hakli & S. M. Amadae - 2018 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 48 (6):608-629.
Children’s acceptance of social robots.Chiara de Jong, Jochen Peter, Rinaldo Kühne & Alex Barco - 2019 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 20 (3):393-425.
AI & Society and society.Lionel Snell - 1989 - AI and Society 3 (3):247-255.
Contraception: A Worldwide Calamity?Patrick G. D. Riley - 2005 - Catholic Social Science Review 10:319-323.
Job insecurity and technology acceptance: an asymmetric dependence.Oxana Krutova, Tuuli Turja, Pertti Koistinen, Harri Melin & Tuomo Särkikoski - 2022 - Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 20 (1):110-133.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-11-15

Downloads
42 (#352,484)

6 months
12 (#157,869)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Piercosma Bisconti
Scuola Superiore di Studi Universitari e di Perfezionamento Sant'Anna

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations