ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
Social dynamics of AI adoption in parents' educational decisions.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Social dynamics of AI adoption in parents' educational decisions.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When adopting a performance-enhancing technology offers short-run relative advantages, competitive pressure can drive diffusion even if most adopters would prefer a collective ban. We study this dynamic in the context of unrestricted AI tools for teenagers' education. In preregistered, incentive-compatible experiments with approximately 2,000 parents in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, we elicit willingness to pay for a three-month premium subscription to a leading general-purpose AI platform. Demand increases steeply with the share of other teenagers using AI: Moving perceived peer take-up from 20% to 80% raises willingness to pay by more than 60%. We then test whether information about emerging evidence on potential downstream skill effects changes behavior. Risk information substantially shifts incentivized beliefs about longer-run impacts but has little effect on individual demand, yet it strongly increases support for school-level restrictions. Follow-up experiments show that peer-adoption information does not significantly shift perceived AI quality, the importance parents assign to core skills, or support for bans, pointing to social pressure rather than social learning as the primary channel. The results reveal a rat-race dynamic in which individual adoption responds to peers even as collective preferences shift toward restriction.
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.