When GenAI writes public foresight reports: Effects on convincing citizens

This study investigates the impact of authorship on the convincingness and willingness to read government foresight reports. Using a preregistered online-based experimental design with 307 participants, this research examines how perceived and actual authorship (human experts vs. generative AI) influence these factors. Our findings show a significant interaction between perceived and actual authorship. Reports perceived as written by AI but actually authored by experts were less convincing, while those perceived as written by experts were more convincing. Higher perceived convincingness correlated with greater willingness to read the full text. Hence, the present research highlights biases and trust issues in AI-generated content, emphasizing the importance of aligning perceived and actual authorship to enhance government communications and public policy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Public Policy and Administration
Published
2025-12-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767251403049
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

When GenAI writes public foresight reports: Effects on convincing citizens

Ali A. Guenduez, Lukas Zumbrunn
Public Policy and Administration
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

When GenAI writes public foresight reports: Effects on convincing citizens

Ali A. Guenduez, Lukas Zumbrunn
article en

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of authorship on the convincingness and willingness to read government foresight reports. Using a preregistered online-based experimental design with 307 participants, this research examines how perceived and actual authorship (human experts vs. generative AI) influence these factors. Our findings show a significant interaction between perceived and actual authorship. Reports perceived as written by AI but actually authored by experts were less convincing, while those perceived as written by experts were more convincing. Higher perceived convincingness correlated with greater willingness to read the full text. Hence, the present research highlights biases and trust issues in AI-generated content, emphasizing the importance of aligning perceived and actual authorship to enhance government communications and public policy.

Public Policy and Administration
University of St.Gallen (CH), Government of the United States of America (US), University of Applied Sciences St. Gallen (CH)
Openalex Percentile: Top 60%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
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.