Artificial Intelligence in Election Campaigns: Perceptions, Penalties, and Implications
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
As political parties around the world experiment with Artificial Intelligence (AI) in election campaigns, concerns about deception and manipulation are rising. This article examines how the public reacts to different uses of AI in elections and the potential consequences for party evaluations and regulatory preferences. Across three preregistered studies with over 7,600 American respondents, we identify three categories of AI use -- campaign operations, voter outreach, and deception. While people generally dislike AI in campaigns, they are especially critical of deceptive uses, which they perceive as norm violations. However, parties engaging in AI-enabled deception face no significant drop in favorability, neither with supporters nor opponents. Instead, deceptive AI use increases public support for stricter AI regulation, including calls for an outright ban on AI development. These findings reveal a misalignment between public disapproval of deceptive AI and the political incentives of parties, underscoring the need for targeted regulatory oversight. Rather than banning AI in elections altogether, regulation should distinguish between harmful and beneficial applications to avoid stifling democratic innovation.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 0 of its 72 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Aug 2024.
Builds on
0 of 72 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
2 papers.
- 2026The GenAI Catch-22: Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Norwegian Newsrooms During the 2025 Parliamentary Election11 Aug 2026
- 2025Winning and losing with Artificial Intelligence: What public discourse about ChatGPT tells us about how societies make sense of technological change9 Jul 2025