Charting the AI Perception Gap: Across 71 scenarios, AI experts (N=119) and the public (N=1100) have differing views on the risks, benefits, and value of AI. More importantly, AI experts discount the influence of risks stronger than the public does when forming their value judgments [R]

A psychometric study across 71 AI scenarios compared mental models between 119 German AI academics and 1,110 public respondents across four dimensions: likelihood, perceived risk, perceived benefit, and overall value. Experts rated occurrence probabilities higher, risks lower, and benefits greater than the public, but the critical finding is experts systematically discount risk weighting when forming value judgments more than laypeople do. This expert-public perception gap has direct implications for AI governance, policy communication, and risk communication frameworks where expert-informed policy may structurally underrepresent public risk concerns. Prior psychometric risk research on nuclear and chemical technologies showed similar expert-layperson divergence, confirming AI follows established patterns of emerging technology risk perception asymmetry.