Aug 2026· Perspectives on Politics· pp. 1-17· 0 citations· 45 references
TL;DR
A framework and research agenda is developed for identifying when AI supports autonomous citizenship, when it substitutes for citizens’ judgment or agency, and why the same systems produce different outcomes across political tasks depending on how citizens use them.
Abstract
Decades of research in political behavior show that citizens struggle with information, rely on cognitive shortcuts, and face barriers to participation. They are increasingly using AI tools to make sense of political information and express views, while interacting with platform curation systems that shape how views circulate through democratic politics. Although these tools appear suited to address the limits of democratic citizenship, they do more than transmit content. They help interpret information, articulate views, and affect what is prioritized, seen, and circulated. In doing so, these systems shape the formation of political judgments and citizens’ capacity to translate them into action. As a result, they can reduce barriers to participation while weakening the independence of political judgment, or they can support reflective preference formation while constraining citizens’ ability to act on those preferences effectively. We call this tension the
autonomy paradox.
To make sense of it, we focus on how citizens engage with AI systems in ways that affect belief formation and political action. We develop a framework and research agenda for identifying when AI supports autonomous citizenship, when it substitutes for citizens’ judgment or agency, and why the same systems produce different outcomes across political tasks depending on how citizens use them.
It is suggested that progress in research on democracy and AI depends not only on further empirical investigation or technical refinement, but also on sustained conceptual work that makes democratic assumptions explicit and thus open to scrutiny.
Joachim S. Wiewiura, A. Jørgensen, Thomas Ploug· Philosophy & Technology· 0 citations
The question of what motivates human behavior is at the heart of efforts to move communities and societies toward more sustainable, equitable, and just relations. Yet, theories of human behavior remain fragmented, contested, and often fail to fully explain why people do what they do. Here, I develop a “political ecol...
It is argued that many of the ways in which computer scientists, deliberative democratic practitioners, and others are using LLMs to do this threatens the non-instrumental value of a collective's ability to determine its own future.
Lorenzo Manuali· Philosophy & Technology· 0 citations
This position paper argues that AI-assisted deliberation offers a more promising path by lowering barriers to meaningful engagement without substituting machine judgment for human choice.
José Ramón Enríquez, Jia-Xin Pei, A. Pentland· 0 citations
The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in political communication has drastically altered the dynamics of democratic politics. Initially, the digital technologies promised enhanced civilian engagement but later facilitated sophisticated forms of psychological manipulation through algorithmic targeting, beha...
R. V. Rodriguez, Naveen Kolloju, Raju Chaketi et al.· Dianoesis· 0 citations
Abstract Democracy depends on people having the capacity to act collectively and navigate difference, yet political science often overlooks the transformative work that enables this. This essay foregrounds democratic organizing: sustained, relational, and strategic work that transforms people – reshaping their identiti...
Daniel J. Galvin, D. Woodly, R. Block et al.· The Forum· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.