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

A preprint surveying 119 AI experts and 1,100 general public respondents across 71 scenarios reveals a structural divergence in AI risk-benefit weighting: experts assign systematically lower influence to perceived risks when forming value judgments, not merely lower risk estimates. Both groups weighted benefits over risks, but experts showed markedly attenuated risk sensitivity. This asymmetry matters for AI governance and policy design, where expert testimony disproportionately shapes regulation. Prior alignment research flags this exact dynamic as a blind spot in technical communities evaluating their own work.