发表机构
University of Chicago; Stanford University; Santa Fe Institute（芝加哥大学; 斯坦福大学; 圣塔菲研究所）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
本研究通过混合方法结合计算文本分析与57名AI专业人士访谈，识别出AI意义建构的三大社会学框架维度，为技术专家和政策制定者提供了应对AI发展认知挑战的框架参考。
AI 中文摘要
人类如何理解人工智能（AI）的快速崛起？本研究开展了一项开放式混合方法研究，结合计算文本分析（涉及数百万篇与AI相关的报纸文章和社交媒体帖子），并基于2021年和2023年对57名AI专业人士进行的半结构化访谈（时间节点为公众兴趣激增前后），探究AI的意义建构动态。研究识别出一系列社会学框架（构建集体认知的解释性图式），并展示AI专业人士如何运用这些框架应对重大认知挑战，例如为AI的社会影响分配责任。本研究构建了三大核心辩论框架，AI专业人士在这些辩论中采用并争论不同框架：（i）AI开发的“方法”，分为自上而下的专家系统与自下而上的涌现能力两类框架；（ii）AI系统的“心智”，范围从被动工具到类人的“数字心智”；（iii）AI使用的“道德”，尤其是关于是否放缓或加快AI开发的决策。随着人类进入变革性AI时代，技术专家和政策制定者必须考虑这些将限定我们的信念、价值观和行动的框架动态。
英文摘要
How can humans make sense of the rapid takeoff of artificial intelligence (AI)? We studied the sensemaking dynamics of AI through an open-ended, mixed-methods study with computational text analysis of millions of AI-related newspaper articles and social media posts grounded in 57 semi-structured interviews with AI professionals in 2021 and 2023--before and after the recent surge of public interest. We identify a range of sociological frames (interpretive schemas that structure collective cognition) and show how AI professionals use frames to address significant cognitive challenges, such as assigning responsibility for societal impacts. We develop a framework of three primary debates across which frames are adopted and contested: (i) the $\textit{method}$ of AI development, between frames of top-down expert systems and bottom-up emergent capabilities, (ii) the $\textit{mind}$ of an AI system, ranging from a passive tool to a humanlike "digital mind," and (iii) the $\textit{morality}$ of how AI is used, particularly the decision of whether to slow down or speed up AI development. As humanity enters the era of transformative AI, technologists and policymakers must account for the framing dynamics that will circumscribe our beliefs, values, and actions.
CommentsAccepted to ACM CSCW 2026
DOI：10.1145/3816971
