[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/3514094.3534179acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaiesConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

No Rage Against the Machines: Threat of Automation Does Not Change Policy Preferences

Published: 27 July 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Labor-saving technology has already decreased employment opportunities for middle-skill workers. Experts anticipate that advances in AI and robotics will cause even more significant disruptions in the labor market over the next two decades. This paper presents three experimental studies that investigate how this profound economic change could affect mass politics. Recent observational studies suggest that workers' exposure to automation risk predicts their support not only for redistribution but also for right-wing populist policies and candidates. Other observational studies, including my own, find that workers underestimate the impact of automation on their job security. Misdirected blame towards immigrants and workers in foreign countries, rather than concerns about workplace automation, could be driving support for right-wing populism. To correct American workers' beliefs about the threats to their jobs, I conducted three survey experiments in which I informed workers about the existent and future impact of workplace automation. While these informational treatments convinced workers that automation threatens American jobs, they failed to change respondents' preferences on welfare, immigration, and trade policies. My research finds that raising awareness about workplace automation did not decrease opposition to globalization or increase support for policies that will prepare workers for future technological disruptions.

Supplementary Material

MP4 File (AIES22-aies164.mp4)
Presentation video: How does the threat of automation affect workers' beliefs and policy preferences? Across three survey experiments, I find that informing workers about the threat of automation makes them perceive that automation is more likely to affect their jobs and other workers' jobs. Nevertheless, the informational treatment did not change their preferences toward social protection or globalization.

References

[1]
Marisa Abrajano and Zoltan L Hajnal.2017. White Backlash: Immigration, Race, and American Politics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
[2]
Alan Abramowitz and Jennifer McCoy. 2019. United States: Racial Resentment, Negative Partisanship, and Polarization in Trump's America. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 681, 1 (2019), 137--156.
[3]
Daron Acemoglu and David Autor. 2011. Skills, Tasks and Technologies: Implications for Employment and Earnings. In Handbook of Labor Economics. Vol. 4. Elsevier, 1043--1171.
[4]
Daron Acemoglu and Pascual Restrepo. 2017. Robots and Jobs: Evidence from US Labor Markets. Technical Report. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/papers/w23285
[5]
Massimo Anelli, Italo Colantone, and Pietro Stanig. 2019. We Were the Robots: Automation in Manufacturing and Voting Behavior in Western Europe. (2019). https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/12485/we-were-the-robots-automation-and-voting-behavior-in-western-europe Working Paper.
[6]
David Autor and Anna Salomons. 2018. Is Automation Labor Share-Displacing? Productivity Growth, Employment, and the Labor Share. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Vol. 2018, 1 (2018), 1--87.
[7]
David H Autor. 2015. Why Are There Still So Many Jobs? The History and Future of Workplace Automation. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 29, 3 (2015), 3--30.
[8]
David H Autor, Frank Levy, and Richard J Murnane. 2003. The Skill Content of Recent Technological Change: An Empirical Exploration. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 118, 4 (2003), 1279--1333.
[9]
Adam J Berinsky, Michele F Margolis, and Michael W Sances. 2014. Separating the Shirkers From the Workers? Making Sure Respondents Pay Attention on Self-Administered Surveys. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 58, 3 (2014), 739--753.
[10]
David E Broockman. 2016. Approaches to Studying Policy Representation. Legislative Studies Quarterly, Vol. 41, 1 (2016), 181--215.
[11]
Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee. 2014 The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies. WW Norton & Company, New York.
[12]
Alexander Coppock and Oliver A McClellan. 2019. Validating the Demographic, Political, Psychological, and Experimental Results Obtained From a New Source of Online Survey Respondents. Research & Politics, Vol. 6, 1 (2019), 2053168018822174.
[13]
Wolfgang Dauth, Sebastian Findeisen, Jens Südekum, and Nicole Woessner. 2017. German Robots-the Impact of Industrial Robots on Workers. (2017). https://ssrn.com/abstract=3039031 CEPR Discussion Paper No. DP12306.
[14]
H David and David Dorn. 2013. The Growth of Low-Skill Service Jobs and the Polarization of the US Labor Market. American Economic Review, Vol. 103, 5 (2013), 1553--97.
[15]
Peter Eckersley and Yomna Nasser. 2019. Measuring the Progress of AI Research. Technical Report. Electronic Frontier Foundation. https://www.eff.org/ai/metrics
[16]
Executive office of the President. 2019. Executive Order 13859 of February 11, 2019: Maintaining American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence. U.S. Federal Register, Vol. 84, 31 (2019), 3967--3972. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-14/pdf/2019-02544.pdf
[17]
Martin Ford. 2015. Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future. Basic Books, New York.
[18]
Carl Benedikt Frey. 2019. The Technology Trap: Capital, Labor, and Power in the Age of Automation. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
[19]
Carl Benedikt Frey, Thor Berger, and Chinchih Chen. 2018. Political Machinery: Did Robots Swing the 2016 US Presidential Election? Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol. 34 (2018), 418--442.
[20]
Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A Osborne. 2017. The Future of Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 114 (2017), 254--280.
[21]
Brian J Gaines, James H Kuklinski, Paul J Quirk, Buddy Peyton, and Jay Verkuilen. 2007. Same Facts, Different Interpretations: Partisan Motivation and Opinion on Iraq. Journal of Politics, Vol. 69, 4 (2007), 957--974.
[22]
Jane Gingrich. 2019. Did State Responses to Automation Matter for Voters? Research & Politics, Vol. 6, 1 (2019), 2053168019832745.
[23]
Maarten Goos and Alan Manning. 2007. Lousy and Lovely Jobs: The Rising Polarization of Work in Britain. The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 89, 1 (2007), 118--133.
[24]
Katja Grace, John Salvatier, Allan Dafoe, Baobao Zhang, and Owain Evans. 2018. When Will AI Exceed Human Performance? Evidence From AI Experts. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, Vol. 62 (2018), 729--754.
[25]
Georg Graetz and Guy Michaels. 2018. Robots at Work. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 100, 5 (2018), 753--768.
[26]
Mary L. Gray and Siddharth Suri. 2019. Ghost Work: How to Stop Silicon Valley from Building a New Global Underclass. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
[27]
Andrew Guess and Alexander Coppock. 2019. Does Counter-Attitudinal Information Cause Backlash? Results From Three Large Survey Experiments. British Journal of Political Science (2019). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123418000327
[28]
Zhen Jie Im, Nonna Mayer, Bruno Palier, and Jan Rovny. 2019. The "Losers of Automation": A Reservoir of Votes for the Radical Right? Research & Politics, Vol. 6, 1 (2019), 2053168018822395.
[29]
Ashley Jardina. 2019. White Identity Politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
[30]
Kabir Khanna and Gaurav Sood. 2018. Motivated Responding in Studies of Factual Learning. Political Behavior, Vol. 40, 1 (2018), 79--101.
[31]
Anton Korinek and Joseph E Stiglitz. 2021. Covid-19 driven advances in automation and artificial intelligence risk exacerbating economic inequality. bmj, Vol. 372 (2021).
[32]
Rorisang Lekalake, Zachary Markovich, Gabirel Nahmias, and Stuart Russell. 2019. Automation Risk and Support for a Universal Basic Income. (2019). Working Paper.
[33]
Edward D Mansfield and Diana C Mutz. 2009. Support for Free Trade: Self-Interest, Sociotropic Politics, and Out-Group Anxiety. International Organization, Vol. 63, 3 (2009), 425--457.
[34]
Edward D Mansfield and Diana C Mutz. 2013. US Versus Them: Mass Attitudes Toward Offshore Outsourcing. World Politics, Vol. 65, 4 (2013), 571--608.
[35]
Guy Michaels, Ashwini Natraj, and John Van Reenen. 2014. Has ICT Polarized Skill Demand? Evidence From Eleven Countries Over Twenty-Five Years. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 96, 1 (2014), 60--77.
[36]
Diana C Mutz. 2018. Status Threat, Not Economic Hardship, Explains the 2016 Presidential Vote. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 115, 19 (2018), E4330-E4339.
[37]
Emily Boardman Ndulue. 2019. How the US Media Covers the Future of Work. Technical Report. Media Cloud. https://mediacloud.org/news/2019/5/8/how-the-us-media-covers-the-future-of-work
[38]
Ljubica Nedelkoska and Glenda Quintini. 2018. Automation, Skills Use and Training. Technical Report. OECD iLibrary. https://doi.org/10.1787/2e2f4eea-en
[39]
Benjamin J Newman and Neil Malhotra. 2019. Economic Reasoning with a Racial Hue: Is the Immigration Consensus Purely Race Neutral? The Journal of Politics, Vol. 81, 1 (2019), 153--166.
[40]
Brendan Nyhan, Ethan Porter, Jason Reifler, and Thomas J Wood. 2019. Taking Fact-Checks Literally but Not Seriously? The Effects of Journalistic Fact-Checking on Factual Beliefs and Candidate Favorability. Political Behavior (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09528-x
[41]
Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler. 2010. When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions. Political Behavior, Vol. 32, 2 (2010), 303--330.
[42]
Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler. 2015. Estimating Fact-Checking's Effects. Technical Report. American Press Institute. https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Estimating-Fact-Checkings-Effect.pdf
[43]
Paul Pierson. 2017. American Hybrid: Donald Trump and the Strange Merger of Populism and Plutocracy. The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 68 (2017), S105--S119.
[44]
Dani Rodrik. 2018. Populism and the Economics of Globalization. Journal of International Business Policy, Vol. 1, 1-2 (2018), 12--33.
[45]
Brian F Schaffner, Matthew Macwilllams, and Tatishe Nteta. 2018. Understanding White Polarization in the 2016 Vote for President: The Sobering Role of Racism and Sexism. Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 133, 1 (2018), 9--35.
[46]
Aaron Smith. 2016. Public Predictions for the Future of Workforce Automation. Technical Report. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewinternet.org/2016/03/10/public-predictions-for-the-future-of-workforce-automation/
[47]
Aaron Smith and Monica Anderson. 2017. Automation in Everyday Life. Technical Report. Pew Research Center. http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/10/04/automation-in-everyday-life/
[48]
Stefan Thewissen and David Rueda. 2019. Automation and the Welfare State: Technological Change as a Determinant of Redistribution Preferences. Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 52, 2 (2019), 171--208.
[49]
Bruce Tonn, Angela Hemrick, and Fred Conrad. 2006. Cognitive Representations of the Future: Survey Results. Futures, Vol. 38, 7 (2006), 810--829.
[50]
Darrell M West. 2018. The Future of Work: Robots, AI, and Automation. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC.
[51]
Erin Winick. 2018. Every Study We Could Find on What Automation Will Do to Jobs, in One Chart. Technical Report. MIT Technology Review https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610005/every-study-we-could-find-on-what-automation-will-do-to-jobs-in-one-chart/
[52]
Thomas Wood and Ethan Porter. 2019. The Elusive Backfire Effect: Mass Attitudes' Steadfast Factual Adherence. Political Behavior, Vol. 41, 1 (2019), 135--163.
[53]
Nicole Wu. 2021. Misattributed blame? Attitudes toward globalization in the age of automation. Political Science Research and Methods (2021), 1--18.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)When automation hits home: Exploring the nuanced relationship between job risk and support for universal basic incomeSocial Science Information10.1177/05390184241298405Online publication date: 29-Nov-2024
  • (2024)Slowing Down or Adapting to Technological Progress? Robot Replacement Risks and Policy PreferencesRegulation & Governance10.1111/rego.12642Online publication date: 15-Nov-2024
  • (2024)Public perceptions of the US innovation system: moderate support but compelling need for reformScience and Public Policy10.1093/scipol/scae082Online publication date: 19-Dec-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. No Rage Against the Machines: Threat of Automation Does Not Change Policy Preferences

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    AIES '22: Proceedings of the 2022 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society
    July 2022
    939 pages
    ISBN:9781450392471
    DOI:10.1145/3514094
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 27 July 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. artificial intelligence and the future of work
    2. automation
    3. political economy
    4. public opinion

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    • CIFAR Azrieli Global Scholars Program
    • Yale Center for the Study of American Politics
    • MIT Political Experiments Research Lab

    Conference

    AIES '22
    Sponsor:
    AIES '22: AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society
    May 19 - 21, 2021
    Oxford, United Kingdom

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 61 of 162 submissions, 38%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)155
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)11
    Reflects downloads up to 23 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)When automation hits home: Exploring the nuanced relationship between job risk and support for universal basic incomeSocial Science Information10.1177/05390184241298405Online publication date: 29-Nov-2024
    • (2024)Slowing Down or Adapting to Technological Progress? Robot Replacement Risks and Policy PreferencesRegulation & Governance10.1111/rego.12642Online publication date: 15-Nov-2024
    • (2024)Public perceptions of the US innovation system: moderate support but compelling need for reformScience and Public Policy10.1093/scipol/scae082Online publication date: 19-Dec-2024
    • (2024)Labour market risks and preferences for EU unemployment insurance: the effect of automation, globalization and migration concernsEuropean Political Science Review10.1017/S1755773924000316(1-21)Online publication date: 2-Dec-2024
    • (2024)Can the digital economy boost rural residents’ income? Evidence from China based on the spatial Durbin modelEconomic Analysis and Policy10.1016/j.eap.2024.01.00481(856-872)Online publication date: Mar-2024
    • (2023)Attitudes toward Automation and the Demand for Policies Addressing Job Loss: the Effects of Information about Trade-OffsSSRN Electronic Journal10.2139/ssrn.4353929Online publication date: 2023
    • (2023)Public Opinion toward Artificial IntelligenceThe Oxford Handbook of AI Governance10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197579329.013.36(553-571)Online publication date: 18-Jul-2023
    • (2023)Public Opinion on Basic Income: What Have We Learnt so Far?The Palgrave International Handbook of Basic Income10.1007/978-3-031-41001-7_14(285-306)Online publication date: 18-Oct-2023

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media