Blame and Cost: Understanding Responsibility Attribution and Financial Risk in AI Usage

ABSTRACT This study examines public perceptions of responsibility and potential damage associated with AI usage across various scenarios, and estimates the financial impact on firms. The survey‐based analyses of AI failures evaluating hypothetical risk scenarios and their economic consequences reveal that sociodemographic determinants shape the perception of financial risks and responsibility in AI‐related scenarios. Respondents strongly attribute responsibility to AI system developers. Stratified analysis based on AI familiarity and educational background reveals significant differences in responsibility attribution, with respondents who are more familiar with AI demonstrating more nuanced perspectives. Furthermore, financial damage estimates vary according to respondents' gender, AI familiarity, and educational background, with female respondents and those less familiar with AI perceiving higher financial risks. The consistency between revenue‐based damage estimates and Likert‐scale financial burden assessments reinforces the robustness of these findings.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management
Published
2026-02-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.70124
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

Blame and Cost: Understanding Responsibility Attribution and Financial Risk in AI Usage

Jelana Budak, Dorian Fildor
Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Blame and Cost: Understanding Responsibility Attribution and Financial Risk in AI Usage

Jelana Budak, Dorian Fildor
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study examines public perceptions of responsibility and potential damage associated with AI usage across various scenarios, and estimates the financial impact on firms. The survey‐based analyses of AI failures evaluating hypothetical risk scenarios and their economic consequences reveal that sociodemographic determinants shape the perception of financial risks and responsibility in AI‐related scenarios. Respondents strongly attribute responsibility to AI system developers. Stratified analysis based on AI familiarity and educational background reveals significant differences in responsibility attribution, with respondents who are more familiar with AI demonstrating more nuanced perspectives. Furthermore, financial damage estimates vary according to respondents' gender, AI familiarity, and educational background, with female respondents and those less familiar with AI perceiving higher financial risks. The consistency between revenue‐based damage estimates and Likert‐scale financial burden assessments reinforces the robustness of these findings.

Journal of Contingencies and Crisis ManagementVol. 34(1)
Institute of Economics Zagreb (HR)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
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.

Blame and Cost: Understanding Responsibility Attribution and Financial Risk in AI Usage — Jelana Budak, Dorian Fildor · Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS