Stanford University's annual AI Index report, released Monday, documents a significant divergence between how AI experts and the general public view the technology's impact on society. The findings align with broader trends of rising public anxiety about artificial intelligence, particularly regarding employment, healthcare, and economic effects.
The data disparity is stark across multiple domains. On medical care, 84% of AI experts predict a largely positive impact over the next 20 years, while only 44% of the U.S. general public holds the same view. The gap widens further on employment: 73% of experts feel positive about AI's impact on how people do their jobs, compared with just 23% of the public. On economic impact, 69% of experts expect positive effects, but only 21% of the public agrees.
Job displacement concerns appear to drive much of the public's skepticism. Nearly two-thirds of Americans, or 64%, believe AI will lead to fewer jobs over the next 20 years. This concern contrasts sharply with expert opinion, which tends toward greater optimism about workforce adaptation.
The broader sentiment gap extends to fundamental trust in institutions. The U.S. reported the lowest trust in government to regulate AI responsibly among surveyed nations at 31%, significantly lower than Singapore's 81%, according to Ipsos data cited in Stanford's report.
Regulatory attitudes suggest the public views current safeguards as inadequate. Nationwide, 41% of respondents said federal AI regulation will not go far enough, while only 27% said it would go too far. This concern reflects growing public anxiety that decision-makers are not adequately addressing potential harms.
Globally, sentiment on AI's overall benefits showed marginal improvement. Those who felt AI products and services offer more benefits than drawbacks rose from 55% in 2024 to 59% in 2025. However, the proportion of respondents who said AI makes them nervous increased from 50% to 52% during the same period, indicating that rising optimism has not offset growing unease.
The disconnect between expert and public views appears rooted in different risk prioritization. AI leaders have focused on managing Artificial General Intelligence—a theoretical superintelligent AI capable of performing any task humans can and thinking independently. The general public, by contrast, prioritizes immediate concerns: job security, utility costs from energy-intensive data centers, and the technology's near-term economic impact.
This divergence reflects broader communication gaps in the technology industry, where leaders and the public operate from different assumptions about AI's most pressing challenges.