Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Andreas Jungherr

@ajungherr.bsky.social

2K followers 140 following 160 posts

Making sense of digital technology - the changes it brings, the opportunities it provides, and the challenges it presents. Professor, University of Bamberg.

Posts Media Videos Starter Packs

Pinned

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · Mar 12

📢 Wie beeinflusst Künstliche Intelligenz Demokratie und Politik? Am Lehrstuhl für Politikwissenschaft, insbes. Digitale Transformation der Uni Bamberg, forschen wir genau dazu. Hier sind einige unserer wichtigsten Studien: 🧵👇

1 1 2

Reposted by Andreas Jungherr

Felix M. Simon @felixsimon.bsky.social · 1d

🚨✨ Publication alert: How do people in 6 countries (🇬🇧 🇺🇸 🇫🇷 🇦🇷 🇩🇰 🇯🇵 ) use AI 🤖 and think about it in the context of information, news, and institutions?

Our new @reutersinstitute.bsky.social survey research (n ≈ 12,000) with @richardfletcher.bsky.social & @rasmuskleis.bsky.social explores this.

1 13 25

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 2d

The article is part of the project “Generative AI in Election Campaigns: Applications, Preferences, and Trust”, funded by the @bidt.bsky.social: www.bidt.digital/forschungspr...

Generative Künstliche Intelligenz im Wahlkampf: Anwendungen, Präferenzen und Vertrauen (AI Wahlkampf) | bidt

Das Projekt untersucht, wie deutsche Parteien generative KI nutzen, deren Einfluss auf Wahlkampagnen und auf das Vertrauen der Öffentlichkeit.

www.bidt.digital

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 2d

Read the #OpenAccess article here: www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

Explaining public preferences for regulating Artificial Intelligence in election campaigns: Evidence from the U.S. and Taiwan

The increasing use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in election campaigns, such as AI-generated political ads, automated messaging, and the widespread …

www.sciencedirect.com

1 1

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 2d

📖 The article contributes to a better understanding of public opinion and digital governance — and shows why international comparison matters for both research and regulation.

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 2d

🌏 Our findings highlight that cultural and societal contexts shape how people think about digital campaign regulation. The same perceptions and cognitions can have very different consequences across countries.

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 2d

General attitudes toward AI also play out differently:

🇺🇸 In the U.S., perceived AI risks increase support for regulation, while perceived AI benefits reduce it.
🇹🇼 In Taiwan, both critical and optimistic citizens tend to support stricter rules.

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 2d

In Taiwan, by contrast, we observe a second-person effect: People favor regulation when they think that both they and others can be influenced by campaigning.

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 2d

In the U.S., we find a third-person effect: People tend to support regulation when they believe others are more influenced by campaign messages than they themselves are.

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 2d

🇺🇸 & 🇹🇼 Majorities in both the U.S. and Taiwan favor clear rules for using AI in election campaigns. But factors correlated with supporting regulation differ markedly between the two countries.

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 2d

🧵 New publication: How do people feel about regulating #AI in election campaigns? 🧵

In a new article, @adrauc.bsky.social, @kunkakom.bsky.social, and I examine when and why people support stronger AI regulation in political competition.

www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

👇

Explaining public preferences for regulating Artificial Intelligence in election campaigns: Evidence from the U.S. and Taiwan

The increasing use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in election campaigns, such as AI-generated political ads, automated messaging, and the widespread …

www.sciencedirect.com

1 11 13

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 9d

🔍 Study: Representative, pre-registered survey experiment (n=1850), conducted by Ipsos, funded by the EU 🇪🇺 as part of the AI4Deliberation project.

👉 Read the article: www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

#AI #Deliberation #DigitalDemocracy #Democracy

(7/7)

Artificial Intelligence in deliberation: The AI penalty and the emergence of a new deliberative divide

Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) promise help for democratic deliberation, such as processing information, moderating discussion, and fact-che…

www.sciencedirect.com

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 9d

⚠️ This means: Even if AI might factually improve the processes of democratic deliberation, there is a risk that its use will exacerbate existing inequalities in willingness to participate.

(6/7)

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 9d

🔸 Positive attitudes toward AI increase acceptance; perceived risks, on the other hand, significantly reduce it.

(5/7)

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 9d

🔸 A new "deliberation divide" emerges: those who are skeptical of AI are less likely to participate.

(4/7)

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 9d

🔸 If people are informed about the use of AI in deliberation, they expect discussions to be of lower quality than when moderated by a human.

(3/7)

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 9d

🧐 Our key findings:

🔸 AI-supported deliberation significantly reduces the willingness to participate.

(2/7)

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 9d

📢 New Journal Article: AI & Deliberation 📢

What impact does #AI have on democratic deliberation? Together with @adrauc.bsky.social, I explore this question in a new article in Government Information Quarterly. Findings in the thread 🧵👇

www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

(1/7)

Artificial Intelligence in deliberation: The AI penalty and the emergence of a new deliberative divide

Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) promise help for democratic deliberation, such as processing information, moderating discussion, and fact-che…

www.sciencedirect.com

1 7 11

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 24d

You can take the speaker out of pol sci, but you can’t take pol sci out of the speaker :)

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 24d

In short: let’s start with what we do control and by doing so, expand our chances to manage interdependencies.

1 1

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 24d

Enforce internal reform of our own institutions & practices that slow development and fuel discontent: politics, journalism, industry-protective tendencies, and EU regulatory habits.

1 1

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 24d

Build capacity and capability for future tech & industries. Not replicate what’s already settled. That gives the EU power it currently lacks to negotiate real commitments from others and better manage interdependencies.

1 1

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 24d

I agree it’s high time to engage. But for me, this is about addressing aspects we can control. I see two arms to this:

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 24d

From a European perspective, that’s a lose–lose.

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 24d

Blaming technology lets institutions dodge responsibility and internal reform, while deepening Europe’s dependencies on foreign infrastructures.

1 1

Andreas Jungherr @ajungherr.bsky.social · 24d

Narratives of “disinformation” and “manipulated unruly publics” too often serve established elites and institutions as a way to avoid facing their own contribution to discontent and reform.

2 2