ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024
Shaping new norms for AI.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toward an integrated and globally equitable understanding of political polarization.Nature communications · 2026Review
- Moral judgments in online discourse are not biased by gender.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Emergent social conventions and collective bias in LLM populations.Science advances · 2025Article
- Testing the limits of large language models in debating humans.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Embracing the future: Integrating ChatGPT into China's nursing education system.International journal of nursing sciences · 2024Article
- Social norm change: drivers and consequences.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly integrated into our lives, the need for new norms is urgent. However, AI evolves at a much faster pace than the characteristic time of norm formation, posing an unprecedented challenge to our societies. This paper examines possible criticalities of the processes of norm formation surrounding AI. It focuses on how new norms can be established, rather than on what these norms should be. It distinguishes different scenarios based on the centralization or decentralization of the norm formation process, analysing the cases where new norms are shaped by formal authorities or informal institutions, or emerge spontaneously in a bottom-up fashion. On the latter point, the paper reports a conversation with ChatGPT in which the LLM discusses some of the emerging norms it has observed. Far from seeking exhaustiveness, this article aims to offer readers interpretive tools to frame society's response to the growing pervasiveness of AI. An outlook on how AI could influence the formation of future social norms emphasizes the importance for open societies to anchor their formal deliberation process in an open, inclusive and transparent public discourse. This article is part of the theme issue 'Social norm change: drivers and consequences'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.