Search results

The surge of artificial intelligence (AI) applications and subsequent adoption by consumers and marketers has ignited substantial research exploring the benefits and opportunities of AI. Despite this, little attention has been given to its unintended negative consequences. In this paper, the authors examine both the practitioner and academic sides of ethical AI. In doing so, the authors conduct an extensive review of the AI literature to identify potential issues pertaining to three areas: individual consumers, societal and legal. The authors identify gaps and offer questions to drive future research.

The authors review recent academic literature on AI in marketing journals, and top ethical principles from three top technology developers (Google, IBM and Meta) in conjunction with media reports of negative AI incents. They also identify gaps and opportunities for future research based on this review.

The bibliographic review reveals a small number of academic papers in marketing that focus on ethical considerations for AI adoption. The authors highlight concerns for academic researchers, marketing practitioners and AI developers across three main areas and highlight important issues relating to interactive marketing.

This paper highlights the under-researched negative outcomes of AI adoption. Through an extensive literature review, coupled with current responsible AI principles adopted by major technology companies, this research provides a framework for examining the dark side of AI.

To elaborate the nature of fact-checking in the domain of political information by examining how fact-checkers assess the validity of claims concerning the Russo-Ukrainian conflict and how they support their assessments by drawing on evidence acquired from diverse sources of information.

Descriptive quantitative and qualitative content analysis of 128 reports written by the fact-checkers of Snopes – an established fact-checking organisation – during the period of 24 February 2022 – 28 June, 2023. For the analysis, nine evaluation grounds were identified, most of them inductively from the empirical material. It was examined how the fact-checkers employed such grounds while assessing the validity of claims and how the assessments were bolstered by evidence acquired from information sources such as newspapers.

Of the 128 reports, the share of assessments indicative of the invalidity of the claims was 54.7%, while the share of positive ratings was 26.7%. The share of mixed assessments was 15.6%. In the fact-checking, two evaluation grounds, that is, the correctness of information and verifiability of an event presented in a claim formed the basis for the assessment. Depending on the topic of the claim, grounds such as temporal and spatial compatibility, as well as comparison by similarity and difference occupied a central role. Most popular sources of information offering evidence for the assessments include statements of government representatives, videos and photographs shared in social media, newspapers and television programmes.

As the study concentrated on fact-checking dealing with political information about a specific issue, the findings cannot be extended to concern the fact-checking practices in other contexts.

The study is among the first to characterise how fact-checkers employ evaluation grounds of diverse kind while assessing the validity of political information.

This chapter looks at challenges that are arising from emerging business models and those that are related to digital finance in general. This chapter first looks at the four challenges relating to new business models, i.e. walled gardens, shadow banking, monetary sovereignty and singleness of money. The chapter then looks at the four challenges relating to digital finance in general, i.e. consumer's data rights, AI ethics, cybersecurity and financial exclusion.

This paper aims to explore the underlying mechanism whereby information-induced stress, resulting from the burdensome nature, questionable information reliability, misleading content and diffuse characteristics of infodemic pressure, impacts individuals’ online information-related behavior and health-related preventive behavior.

We conducted a cross-sectional survey organized with social media users during the post-pandemic period. Based on the 342 valid responses, structural equation modeling was employed to validate the research model.

The results substantiate our multidimensional view of infodemic stress, which encompasses dimensions including information overload, uncertainty, diffusivity and insecurity. We found that the infodemic stress contributes to pandemic fatigue, then engenders both negative information behavior and reduced engagement in preventive behavior. Furthermore, infodemic stress has also been found to have a direct positive effect on individuals’ engagement in preventive behavior.

This study introduces the concept of “infodemic stress” and presents a comprehensive framework to capture its various dimensions. This study offers novel insights into the psychological and behavioral repercussions of the infodemic stress transmitted through social media.