Despite the burgeoning interest in generative artificial intelligence (AI), specifically ChatGPT, little is known about the underlying user motivations and concerns that may shape technology acceptance indicators, such as post popularity and engagement on online platforms. Guided by the uses and gratifications and technology acceptance approaches, this study utilizes ecologically valid social media data to unearth user-driven topics and themes on Reddit. We extracted six key themes: utilitarian, hedonic, and social gratifications, creativity enhancement, and technical and societal concerns. Our results showed that specific topics of gratifications and concerns predicted post scores and comments in different patterns. Our findings could offer guidance for developers and policymakers, underlining the necessity for user-centric and ethically informed generative AI systems that address technological prowess and societal implications.

Although developing successful autonomous vehicles for practical use is of interest, the establishment of moral autonomous vehicles aligned with human values is also crucial. Prior studies have mainly examined moral decision making in the trolley dilemma of autonomous vehicles, i.e., the driverless dilemma. Relatively little is known, however, about the passenger acceptance (specifically like, use, trust, and communication) of autonomous vehicles in the driverless dilemma. Results of a correlational study (Study 1) and an experimental study (Study 2) found that participants as the passengers were more likely to like, use, trust, and communicate with autonomous vehicles programmed to protect self than protect others and be random in a one-passenger-one-pedestrian scenario representing the one-to-one dilemma. However, in most conditions participants showed no preference for either pro-self, pro-social, or random algorithms in the one-passenger-several-pedestrian scenarios implying the utilitarian dilemma (Studies 1 and 2). The variation of passenger did not affect acceptance of autonomous vehicles in the driverless dilemma (Study 2).

This study examined the possibility of cooperation between human and communicative artificial intelligence (AI) by conducting a prisoner’s dilemma experiment. A 2 (AI vs human partner) × 2 (cooperative vs non-cooperative partner) between-subjects six-trial prisoner’s dilemma experiment was employed. Participants played the strategy game with a cooperative AI, non-cooperative AI, cooperative human, and non-cooperative human partner. Results showed that when partners (both communicative AI and human partners) proposed cooperation on the first trial, 80% to 90% of the participants also cooperated. More than 75% kept the promise and decided to cooperate. About 60% to 80% proposed, committed, and decided to cooperate when their partner proposed and kept the commitment to cooperate across trials, no matter whether the partner was a cooperative human or communicative AI. Overall, participants were more likely to commit and cooperate with cooperative AI partners than with non-cooperative AI and human partners.