ArticleBrain and behavior2025
Dark Future: Development and Initial Validation of Artificial Intelligence Conspiracy Beliefs Scale (AICBS).
Article in Brain and behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the past few years, the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) and its success in many areas of everyday life have attracted global attention. Some discussions have noted that generative AI tools can make decisions on their own with the potential to improve themselves. Subsequently, conspiracy theories have emerged concerning the future implications of AI. In the present study, the Artificial Intelligence Conspiracy Beliefs Scale (AICBS) was developed to assess conspiracy beliefs concerning AI, andits psychometric properties were examined.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted with 788 Turkish participants (M
resultsThe five-factor structure explained 62.58% of the total variance. The CFA showed acceptable model fit indices and confirmed the EFA's five-factor structure. Based on the EFA's factor loadings, a short five-item version of the AICBS (AICBS-5) was developed with one item from each subdimension (which explained 45.28% of the variance). The CFA confirmed the unidimensional structure of the AICBS-5. The internal consistency coefficients of the AICBS, its subdimensions, and the AICBS-5 demonstrated very good reliability. Correlation analyses with external criterion measures (AI Anxiety Scale, Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale-5, and Anomie) supported the concurrent validity of the AICBS, its subdimensions, and the AICBS-5.
conclusionThe findings demonstrate that both AICBS and AICBS-5 are valid and reliable psychometric instruments to assess AI conspiracy beliefs.
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.