Generative <scp>AI</scp> Search Engines as Arbiters of Public Knowledge: An Audit of Bias and Authority

ABSTRACT This paper reports on an audit study of generative AI systems (ChatGPT, Bing Chat, and Perplexity), which investigates how these new search engines construct responses and establish authority for topics of public importance. We collected system responses using a set of 48 authentic queries for 4 topics over 7 days, and analyzed the data using sentiment analysis, inductive coding, and source classification. Results provide an overview of the nature of system responses across these systems, and provide evidence of sentiment bias based on the queries and topics, and commercial and geographic biases in sources. The quality of sources used to support claims is uneven, relying heavily on News and Media, Business and Digital Media websites. Implications for system users emphasize the need to critically examine Generative AI system outputs when making decisions related to public interest and personal well‐being.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.1021
Citations
9
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.73

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Generative AI Search Engines as Arbiters of Public Knowledge: An Audit of Bias and Authority

Alice Li, Luanne Sinnamon
9 citations
Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
4.73
article

Generative AI Search Engines as Arbiters of Public Knowledge: An Audit of Bias and Authority

Alice Li, Luanne Sinnamon
article en
9 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper reports on an audit study of generative AI systems (ChatGPT, Bing Chat, and Perplexity), which investigates how these new search engines construct responses and establish authority for topics of public importance. We collected system responses using a set of 48 authentic queries for 4 topics over 7 days, and analyzed the data using sentiment analysis, inductive coding, and source classification. Results provide an overview of the nature of system responses across these systems, and provide evidence of sentiment bias based on the queries and topics, and commercial and geographic biases in sources. The quality of sources used to support claims is uneven, relying heavily on News and Media, Business and Digital Media websites. Implications for system users emphasize the need to critically examine Generative AI system outputs when making decisions related to public interest and personal well‐being.

Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and TechnologyVol. 61(1)
University of British Columbia (CA)
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
4.73
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.