A Study on the Convergence of Policy Demands Regarding Public Risk Expressions of Generative AI—A Computational Analysis Based on Weibo Texts
Main Article Content
Keywords
generative artificial intelligence, risk expression, policy demands, regulatory convergence, Weibo, computational social science
Abstract
This paper analyzes texts attached to generative AI discussions on the Weibo platform (N=1,027) and employs BERTopic topic modeling and Logit regression to examine the association patterns between three types of risk expressions and regulatory demands. The study finds that the three types of risk expressions accounted for 47.7% of the whole sample, including ethical risks at 30.6% (314 posts), job displacement risks at 16.2% (166 posts), and data security risks at 1.0% (10 posts); In the sample, expressions of data security risks and ethical risks showed a statistically significant positive association with the probability of mentioning regulatory demands (p < 0.01), while the effect of job displacement risks did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.101); because of the extremely low frequency of mentions (only 2 instances each), ethical norms and industrial support demands failed to meet the conditions for statistical inference. Meanwhile, negative sentiment is the core textual feature distinguishing expressions of ethical risks (OR = 1.42). This paper reveals the “regulatory convergence” characteristic of risk discourse on the Weibo platform, in which discourses on different risk types exhibit diverse expression patterns regarding policy outlets, which presents an empirical reference for understanding the discursive relationship between public risk expressions and policy demands.
References
- [1]Chengfu Zhang & Haocheng Li. (2023). Risk governance in the era of artificial intelligence: Public perception and institutional response. E-Government.
- [2]Zhichao Li & Lujia Li. (2024). Types and evolution of public risk perception of artificial intelligence: A global perspective analysis. Journal of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (Social Sciences Edition), 26 (6), 21–33.
- [3]Siyan Nie & Jianghua Yang. (2024). Public perception of new-generation artificial intelligence technology from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Intelligence, 43 (9), 130–138.
- [4]Guan Li, Lingzhi Sun & Mingxiang He. (2024). Quantitative analysis of “attention–satisfaction” in public cognition under generative artificial intelligence: Taking Weibo platform as an example. Digital Library Forum, 20 (10), 9–21.
- [5]Zhiling Yin, Xiaoxue Shi, Xiao Huang & Xinyuan Lu. (2025). Public opinion dynamics and public cognition evolution of generative artificial intelligence technology: A study on Weibo public opinion based on ChatGPT. Knowledge Management Forum, 10 (4), 335–347. https://doi.org/10.13266/j.issn.2095-5472.2025.022.
- [6]Yingying Lin & Bailing Nong. (2026). Research on generative artificial intelligence public opinion in social media: A computational communication analysis based on ChatGPT and Sora Weibo topics. Journal of Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications (Social Science Edition), (1).
- [7]Liang Ma. (2024). Public participation in digital technology governance: Demand expression and policy transformation. Administrative Tribune.
- [8]Le Cheng. (2024). The situation, challenges, and prospects of generative artificial intelligence governance. People’s Tribune, (2), 76–81.
- [9]Shuai Han, et al. (2026). Impact mechanism and preventive strategies for public occupational security risks arising from the adoption of generative artificial intelligence. Journal of Tsinghua University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 66 (4), 832–845. https://doi.org/10.16511/j.cnki.qhdxxb.2025.26.053.
- [10]Li, J., et al. (2020). Sentiment analysis of Chinese microblog based on SnowNLP. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1631(1), 012083.
Article Sidebar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.