Balancing Innovation and Control: Public Views on Risks and Governance of AI in Political Communication

ABSTRACT With the rise of AI, concerns about its potential for manipulation in political communication have intensified, accompanied by discussions about regulatory measures. Research has explored perceptions of risks and preferences regarding AI use and regulations among the general population, and in fields such as journalism. However, little is known about attitudes toward AI in political communication or how individual factors, such as internal and external political efficacy, may shape these views. Using a representative survey of the German population ( N = 1991), this study aims to assess citizens′ perceptions of risks, acceptance, and regulations for AI use in political communication, and predictors of these attitudes. Results show that AI is perceived as risky and is associated with threats to democracy. AI tasks such as translations are more accepted than its use for creating realistic visual content. Transparency measures are preferred over stricter regulations. Knowledge and curiosity about technology are associated with a more nuanced perspective on regulations, favoring transparency. Fears about AI increase, while external political efficacy decreases preferences for regulatory intervention. Findings underscore that the use of AI in political communication requires education about AI, transparency, and targeted regulatory measures to address concerns and build acceptance for its use.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Policy & Internet
Published
2026-02-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.70027
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

Balancing Innovation and Control: Public Views on Risks and Governance of AI in Political Communication

Simon Kruschinski, Pablo Jost, Tobias Scherer, Hannah Fecher
Policy & Internet
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Balancing Innovation and Control: Public Views on Risks and Governance of AI in Political Communication

Simon Kruschinski, Pablo Jost, Tobias Scherer, Hannah Fecher
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT With the rise of AI, concerns about its potential for manipulation in political communication have intensified, accompanied by discussions about regulatory measures. Research has explored perceptions of risks and preferences regarding AI use and regulations among the general population, and in fields such as journalism. However, little is known about attitudes toward AI in political communication or how individual factors, such as internal and external political efficacy, may shape these views. Using a representative survey of the German population ( N = 1991), this study aims to assess citizens′ perceptions of risks, acceptance, and regulations for AI use in political communication, and predictors of these attitudes. Results show that AI is perceived as risky and is associated with threats to democracy. AI tasks such as translations are more accepted than its use for creating realistic visual content. Transparency measures are preferred over stricter regulations. Knowledge and curiosity about technology are associated with a more nuanced perspective on regulations, favoring transparency. Fears about AI increase, while external political efficacy decreases preferences for regulatory intervention. Findings underscore that the use of AI in political communication requires education about AI, transparency, and targeted regulatory measures to address concerns and build acceptance for its use.

Policy & InternetVol. 18(1)
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE), GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 53%
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.