IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0294028.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

American public opinion on artificial intelligence in healthcare

Author

Listed:
  • Jessica Rojahn
  • Andrea Palu
  • Steven Skiena
  • Jason J Jones

Abstract

Billions of dollars are being invested into developing medical artificial intelligence (AI) systems and yet public opinion of AI in the medical field seems to be mixed. Although high expectations for the future of medical AI do exist in the American public, anxiety and uncertainty about what it can do and how it works is widespread. Continuing evaluation of public opinion on AI in healthcare is necessary to ensure alignment between patient attitudes and the technologies adopted. We conducted a representative-sample survey (total N = 203) to measure the trust of the American public towards medical AI. Primarily, we contrasted preferences for AI and human professionals to be medical decision-makers. Additionally, we measured expectations for the impact and use of medical AI in the future. We present four noteworthy results: (1) The general public strongly prefers human medical professionals make medical decisions, while at the same time believing they are more likely to make culturally biased decisions than AI. (2) The general public is more comfortable with a human reading their medical records than an AI, both now and “100 years from now.” (3) The general public is nearly evenly split between those who would trust their own doctor to use AI and those who would not. (4) Respondents expect AI will improve medical treatment but more so in the distant future than immediately.

Suggested Citation

  • Jessica Rojahn & Andrea Palu & Steven Skiena & Jason J Jones, 2023. "American public opinion on artificial intelligence in healthcare," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(11), pages 1-17, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0294028
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0294028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0294028
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0294028&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0294028?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chiara Longoni & Andrea Bonezzi & Carey K Morewedge, 2019. "Resistance to Medical Artificial Intelligence," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 46(4), pages 629-650.
    2. Alkire (née Nasr), Linda & O'Connor, Genevieve E. & Myrden, Susan & Köcher, Sören, 2020. "Patient experience in the digital age: An investigation into the effect of generational cohorts," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    3. repec:dar:wpaper:138565 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Chen, Changdong, 2024. "How consumers respond to service failures caused by algorithmic mistakes: The role of algorithmic interpretability," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    2. Tinglong Dai & Sridhar Tayur, 2022. "Designing AI‐augmented healthcare delivery systems for physician buy‐in and patient acceptance," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(12), pages 4443-4451, December.
    3. Leah Warfield Smith & Randall Lee Rose & Alex R. Zablah & Heath McCullough & Mohammad “Mike” Saljoughian, 2023. "Examining post-purchase consumer responses to product automation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 530-550, May.
    4. Siliang Tong & Nan Jia & Xueming Luo & Zheng Fang, 2021. "The Janus face of artificial intelligence feedback: Deployment versus disclosure effects on employee performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(9), pages 1600-1631, September.
    5. Tse, Tiffany Tsz Kwan & Hanaki, Nobuyuki & Mao, Bolin, 2024. "Beware the performance of an algorithm before relying on it: Evidence from a stock price forecasting experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    6. Gansser, Oliver Alexander & Reich, Christina Stefanie, 2021. "A new acceptance model for artificial intelligence with extensions to UTAUT2: An empirical study in three segments of application," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    7. De Bruyn, Arnaud & Viswanathan, Vijay & Beh, Yean Shan & Brock, Jürgen Kai-Uwe & von Wangenheim, Florian, 2020. "Artificial Intelligence and Marketing: Pitfalls and Opportunities," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 91-105.
    8. Zhao, Taiyang & Ran, Yaxuan & Wu, Banggang & Lynette Wang, Valerie & Zhou, Liying & Lu Wang, Cheng, 2024. "Virtual versus human: Unraveling consumer reactions to service failures through influencer types," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    9. Fan, Xiaoming, 2024. "Fintech platforms and information service quality from the perspective of investor cognition," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    10. Ekaterina Jussupow & Kai Spohrer & Armin Heinzl & Joshua Gawlitza, 2021. "Augmenting Medical Diagnosis Decisions? An Investigation into Physicians’ Decision-Making Process with Artificial Intelligence," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 713-735, September.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:3:p:449-451 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Wang, Xun & Rodrigues, Vasco Sanchez & Demir, Emrah & Sarkis, Joseph, 2024. "Algorithm aversion during disruptions: The case of safety stock," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    13. Felix Holzmeister & Martin Holmén & Michael Kirchler & Matthias Stefan & Erik Wengström, 2023. "Delegation Decisions in Finance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(8), pages 4828-4844, August.
    14. Rather, Raouf Ahmad & Hollebeek, Linda D., 2021. "Customers’ service-related engagement, experience, and behavioral intent: Moderating role of age," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    15. Poushneh, Atieh & Vasquez-Parraga, Arturo & Gearhart, Richard S., 2024. "The effect of empathetic response and consumers’ narcissism in voice-based artificial intelligence," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    16. Kim, Jeong Hyun & Kim, Jungkeun & Baek, Tae Hyun & Kim, Changju, 2025. "ChatGPT personalized and humorous recommendations," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    17. Chen, Yaqi & Wang, Haizhong & Rao Hill, Sally & Li, Binglian, 2024. "Consumer attitudes toward AI-generated ads: Appeal types, self-efficacy and AI’s social role," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    18. Chiara Longoni & Andrea Bonezzi & Carey K. Morewedge, 2020. "Resistance to medical artificial intelligence is an attribute in a compensatory decision process: response to Pezzo and Becksted (2020)," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 446-448, May.
    19. Yang, Yikai & Zheng, Jiehui & Yu, Yining & Qiu, Yiling & Wang, Lei, 2024. "The role of recommendation sources and attribute framing in online product recommendations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    20. Brüns, Jasper David & Meißner, Martin, 2024. "Do you create your content yourself? Using generative artificial intelligence for social media content creation diminishes perceived brand authenticity," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    21. Weiguang Wang & Guodong (Gordon) Gao & Ritu Agarwal, 2024. "Friend or Foe? Teaming Between Artificial Intelligence and Workers with Variation in Experience," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(9), pages 5753-5775, September.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0294028. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.