IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/beh/jbepv1/v9y2025i2p1-22.html

Transparency and Public Communication Foster Trust in AI Companies

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Prissé

    (Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities, Singapore University of Technology and Design)

  • Assel Mussagulova

    (The School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Sydney)

  • Jun Quan Ho

    (Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities, Singapore University of Technology and Design)

Abstract

This study examines how organizational characteristics of companies producing Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies influence public trust through a vignette-based experimental design. Building on prior frameworks of trust, we focus on five sub-dimensions of trust: Benevolence, Standards and Guidelines, Data Quality, Reliability, and Transparency, each with three different levels. Results indicate that Transparency and Benevolence are the most significant drivers of trust. Organizations that provide clear explanations of their AI technologies and demonstrate societal accountability by seeking and incorporating public feedback are viewed more favorably. Adherence to external standards, such as national or international guidelines, further enhances trust, while technical performance and data quality are less influential, as participants assume the technology is functioning adequately for their limited use. We conclude that transparent practices, societal engagement, and institutional collaboration will foster public confidence in companies producing AI technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Prissé & Assel Mussagulova & Jun Quan Ho, 2025. "Transparency and Public Communication Foster Trust in AI Companies," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 9(2), pages 1-22, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:beh:jbepv1:v:9:y:2025:i:2:p:1-22
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://sabeconomics.org/journal/RePEc/beh/JBEPv1/articles/JBEP-9-2-1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christoph Engel, 2011. "Dictator games: a meta study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(4), pages 583-610, November.
    2. Hooks, D. & Davis, Z. & Agrawal, V. & Li, Z., 2022. "Exploring factors influencing technology adoption rate at the macro level: A predictive model," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    3. Larney, Andrea & Rotella, Amanda & Barclay, Pat, 2019. "Stake size effects in ultimatum game and dictator game offers: A meta-analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 61-72.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Tosun, 2022. "Endogenous Game Choice and Giving Behavior in Distribution Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-32, November.
    2. Tontrup, Stephan & Arlen, Jennifer & Sprigman, Christopher Jon, 2025. "Behavioral Self-Management and the Strategic Shifting of Fairness Norms," EconStor Preprints 335552, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    3. Čellárová, Katarína & Staněk, Rostislav, 2024. "Contest and resource allocation: An experimental analysis of entitlement and self-selection effects," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    4. Gruner, Sven & Lehberger, Mira & Hirschauer, Norbert & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2022. "How (un)informative are experiments with students for other social groups? A study of agricultural students and farmers," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(03), January.
    5. Horky, Florian & Krell, Felix & Fidrmuc, Jarko, 2023. "Setting the stage: Fairness behavior in virtual reality dictator games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Chisadza, Carolyn & Nicholls, Nicky & Yitbarek, Eleni, 2023. "The role of incentive structure in eliciting willingness to donate," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    7. Cochard, François & Flage, Alexandre, 2024. "Sharing losses in dictator and ultimatum games: A meta-analysis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    8. Ashley Harrell, 2021. "How can I help you? Multiple resource availability promotes generosity with low-value (but not high-value) resources," Rationality and Society, , vol. 33(3), pages 341-362, August.
    9. Umer, Hamza, 2020. "Revisiting generosity in the dictator game: Experimental evidence from Pakistan," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    10. Barreiro-Hurle, Jesus & Dessart, Francois J. & Rommel, Jens & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Espinosa-Goded, Maria & Rodriguez-Entrena, Macario & Thomas, Fabian & Zagorska, Katarzyna, 2023. "Willing or complying? The delicate interplay between voluntary and mandatory interventions to promote farmers' environmental behavior," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    11. Hopp, Daniel, 2022. "High incentives without high cost - The role of (perceived) stake sizes in dictator games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    12. Bilancini, Ennio & Boncinelli, Leonardo & Guarnieri, Pietro & Spadoni, Lorenzo, 2023. "Delaying and motivating decisions in the (Bully) dictator game," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    13. Umer, Hamza & Kurosaki, Takashi & Iwasaki, Ichiro, 2022. "Unearned Endowment and Charity Recipient Lead to Higher Donations: A Meta-Analysis of the Dictator Game Lab Experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    14. Mirre Stallen & Luuk L. Snijder & Jörg Gross & Leon P. Hilbert & Carsten K. W. Dreu, 2023. "Partner choice and cooperation in social dilemmas can increase resource inequality," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-10, December.
    15. Valerio Capraro & Andrea Vanzo, 2019. "The power of moral words: Loaded language generates framing effects in the extreme dictator game," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(3), pages 309-317, May.
    16. Wendelin Schnedler & Nina Lucia Stephan, 2020. "Revisiting a Remedy Against Chains of Unkindness," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 72(3), pages 347-364, July.
    17. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Fecher, Benedikt & Harhoff, Dietmar & Wagner, Gert G., 2019. "Replication studies in economics—How many and which papers are chosen for replication, and why?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 48(1), pages 62-83.
    18. Anna Dreber & Tore Ellingsen & Magnus Johannesson & David Rand, 2013. "Do people care about social context? Framing effects in dictator games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(3), pages 349-371, September.
    19. Ertac, Seda & Gumren, Mert & Gurdal, Mehmet Y., 2020. "Demand for decision autonomy and the desire to avoid responsibility in risky environments: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    20. António Osório, 2017. "A Sequential Allocation Problem: The Asymptotic Distribution of Resources," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 357-377, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:beh:jbepv1:v:9:y:2025:i:2:p:1-22. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SABE Journal JBEP (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sabeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.