AI can help humans find common ground in democratic deliberation

Finding agreement through a free exchange of views is often difficult. Collective deliberation can be slow, difficult to scale, and unequally attentive to different voices. In this study, we trained an artificial intelligence (AI) to mediate human deliberation. Using participants' personal opinions and critiques, the AI mediator iteratively generates and refines statements that express common ground among the group on social or political issues. Participants (<i>N</i> = 5734) preferred AI-generated statements to those written by human mediators, rating them as more informative, clear, and unbiased. Discussants often updated their views after the deliberation, converging on a shared perspective. Text embeddings revealed that successful group statements incorporated dissenting voices while respecting the majority position. These findings were replicated in a virtual citizens' assembly involving a demographically representative sample of the UK population.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Science
Published
2024-10-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adq2852
Citations
111
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
58.38
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

AI can help humans find common ground in democratic deliberation

Lucy Campbell-Gillingham, Christopher Summerfield, Michiel A. Bakker, Hannah Sheahan et al.
111 citations
Science
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
58.38
article

AI can help humans find common ground in democratic deliberation

Lucy Campbell-Gillingham, Christopher Summerfield, Michiel A. Bakker, Hannah Sheahan, Geoff Evans, Michael Henry Tessler, Raphaël Koster, Matthew Botvinick, David C. Parkes, Martin J. Chadwick, Daniel Jarrett, Tantum Collins
article en
111 citations

Abstract

Finding agreement through a free exchange of views is often difficult. Collective deliberation can be slow, difficult to scale, and unequally attentive to different voices. In this study, we trained an artificial intelligence (AI) to mediate human deliberation. Using participants' personal opinions and critiques, the AI mediator iteratively generates and refines statements that express common ground among the group on social or political issues. Participants (<i>N</i> = 5734) preferred AI-generated statements to those written by human mediators, rating them as more informative, clear, and unbiased. Discussants often updated their views after the deliberation, converging on a shared perspective. Text embeddings revealed that successful group statements incorporated dissenting voices while respecting the majority position. These findings were replicated in a virtual citizens' assembly involving a demographically representative sample of the UK population.

ScienceVol. 386(6719)
Harvard University (US), Yale University (US), University of Oxford (GB), Google DeepMind (United Kingdom) (GB), Google (United Kingdom) (GB)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
58.38
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.