CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 25

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

AI Attitudes Among Marginalized Populations in the U.S.: Nonbinary, Transgender, and Disabled Individuals Report More Negative AI Attitudes

Haimson, Oliver L., Mayworm, Samuel Reiji, Ingber, Alexis Shore, Andalibi, Nazanin·2025·Proceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency
DOI 10.1145/3715275.3732081
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3715275.3732081

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Haimson et al. (2025) found in a nationally representative US survey that non-binary and transgender participants reported significantly more negative attitudes toward AI than cisgender participants.

    “Haimson et al. (2025) found in a nationally representative US survey that non-binary and transgender participants reported significantly more negative attitudes toward AI than cisgender participants.”

    From Artificial intelligence and immersive technologies for LGBTQ+ youth: a narrative review (2026) · cites this paper as Haimson et al. (2025)

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 86

  1. Peter Anderberg Shahryar Eivazzadeh and Johan Sanmartin Berglund. 2019. A Novel Instrument for Measuring Older People’s Attitudes Toward Technology (TechPH): Development and Validation. Journal of Medical Internet Research 21 5 (May 2019) e13951. 10.2196/13951Company: Journal of Medical Internet Research Distributor: Journal of Medical Internet Research Institution: Journal of Medical Internet Research Label: Journal of Medical Internet Research Publisher: JMIR Publications Inc. Toronto Canada. · DOI
  2. Christoffer Koch Andersen. 2024. Decoding Digital Denmark: Assessing the State of Algorithmic Violence and Trans (Un)Liveability in Denmark. 10.31235/osf.io/986dc · DOI
  3. 10.1145/3628096.3629046 · DOI
  4. Theo Araujo Natali Helberger Sanne Kruikemeier and Claes H. de Vreese. 2020. In AI we trust? Perceptions about automated decision-making by artificial intelligence. AI & SOCIETY 35 3 (Sept. 2020) 611–623. 10.1007/s00146-019-00931-w · DOI · Paper page
  5. Luye Bao Nicole M. Krause Mikhaila N. Calice Dietram A. Scheufele Christopher D. Wirz Dominique Brossard Todd P. Newman and Michael A. Xenos. 2022. Whose AI? How different publics think about AI and its social impacts. Computers in Human Behavior 130 (May 2022) 107182. 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107182 · DOI
  6. Jascha Bareis and Christian Katzenbach. 2022. Talking AI into Being: The Narratives and Imaginaries of National AI Strategies and Their Performative Politics. Science Technology & Human Values 47 5 (Sept. 2022) 855–881. 10.1177/01622439211030007 · DOI
  7. Greta R. Bauer. 2014. Incorporating intersectionality theory into population health research methodology: Challenges and the potential to advance health equity. Social Science & Medicine 110 (June 2014) 10–17. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.03.022 · DOI
  8. Oliver J. Bear Don’t Walk Amandalynne Paullada Avery Everhart Reggie Casanova-Perez Trevor Cohen and Tiffany Veinot. 2024. Opportunities for incorporating intersectionality into biomedical informatics. J. of Biomedical Informatics 154 C (July 2024). 10.1016/j.jbi.2024.104653 · DOI
  9. Rewina Bedemariam and Jennifer L. Wessel. 2023. The roles of outcome and race on applicant reactions to AI systems. Computers in Human Behavior 148 (Nov. 2023) 107869. 10.1016/j.chb.2023.107869 · DOI
  10. Ruha Benjamin. 2019. Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code. Polity Press, Cambridge.
  11. 10.1145/3411764.3445498 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Cynthia L. Bennett and Os Keyes. 2020. What is the point of fairness? disability AI and the complexity of justice. SIGACCESS Access. Comput.125 (March 2020) 5:1. 10.1145/3386296.3386301 · DOI
  13. Tolga Bolukbasi, Kai-Wei Chang, James Y Zou, Venkatesh Saligrama, and Adam T Kalai. 2016. Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddings. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 29. Curran Associates, Inc.https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2016/hash/a486cd07e4ac3d270571622f4f316ec5-Abstract.html
  14. Cristina Bosco Fereshtehossadat Shojaei Alec A. Theisz Vivian Nguyen Haoru Song Ruixiang Han John A. Osorio Torres Darshil Chheda Jenny Lin Xinran Peng Nawal Z. Waseem Chelsea Simpkins Bianca Cureton Anna K. Himes Nenette M. Jessup Yvonne Lu Hugh C. Hendrie Priscilla A. Barnes Carl V. Hill and Patrick C. Shih. 2025. “I don’t see anything specifically about Black/African Americans.” Testing an Alzheimer-specific generative AI tool tailored for African American/Black communities. ACM Trans. Comput. Healthcare (Jan. 2025). 10.1145/3712295Just Accepted. · DOI
  15. Nicola Luigi Bragazzi Andrea Crapanzano Manlio Converti Riccardo Zerbetto and Rola Khamisy-Farah. 2023. The Impact of Generative Conversational Artificial Intelligence on the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender and Queer Community: Scoping Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research 25 1 (Dec. 2023) e52091. 10.2196/52091Company: Journal of Medical Internet Research Distributor: Journal of Medical Internet Research Institution: Journal of Medical Internet Research Label: Journal of Medical Internet Research Publisher: JMIR Publications Inc. Toronto Canada. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Philipp Brauner Felix Glawe Gian Luca Liehner Luisa Vervier and Martina Ziefle. 2024. AI Perceptions Across Cultures: Similarities and Differences in Expectations Risks Benefits Tradeoffs and Value in Germany and China. 10.48550/arXiv.2412.13841arXiv:https://arXiv.org/abs/2412.13841 [cs]. · DOI
  17. 10.1145/3593013.3594005 · DOI
  18. Joy Buolamwini and Timnit Gebru. 2018. Gender Shades: Intersectional Accuracy Disparities in Commercial Gender Classification. In Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency. PMLR, 77–91. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v81/buolamwini18a.html ISSN: 2640-3498.
  19. 10.1145/3306618.3314232 · DOI
  20. 10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.150 · DOI
  21. Matthew Feeney. 2022. When AI Meets the Transgender Community. Technical Report. Cato Institute. https://policycommons.net/artifacts/2450259/when-ai-meets-the-transgender-community/3472055/ Publisher: <bound method Organization.get_name_with_acronym of <Organization: Cato Institute>>.
  22. 10.1145/3597638.3608955 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Vagrant Gautam Arjun Subramonian Anne Lauscher and Os Keyes. 2024. Stop! In the Name of Flaws: Disentangling Personal Names and Sociodemographic Attributes in NLP. http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.17159 arXiv:https://arXiv.org/abs/2405.17159 [cs]. · arXiv
  24. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190067397.013.16 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Tarleton Gillespie. 2024. Generative AI and the politics of visibility. Big Data & Society 11 2 (June 2024) 20539517241252131. 10.1177/20539517241252131 · DOI · Paper page
  26. 10.1145/3597638.3614548 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Simone Grassini. 2023. Development and validation of the AI attitude scale (AIAS-4): a brief measure of general attitude toward artificial intelligence. Frontiers in Psychology 14 (July 2023). 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1191628Publisher: Frontiers. · DOI · Paper page
  28. Alice Guan Marilyn Thomas Eric Vittinghoff Lisa Bowleg Christina Mangurian and Paul Wesson. 2021. An investigation of quantitative methods for assessing intersectionality in health research: A systematic review. SSM - Population Health 16 (Dec. 2021) 100977. 10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100977 · DOI
  29. Oliver L. Haimson Daniel Delmonaco Peipei Nie and Andrea Wegner. 2021. Disproportionate Removals and Differing Content Moderation Experiences for Conservative Transgender and Black Social Media Users: Marginalization and Moderation Gray Areas. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5 CSCW2 (Oct. 2021) 466:1–466:35. 10.1145/3479610 · DOI
  30. 10.1145/3173574.3173582 · DOI
  31. Sandra G. Harding. 2004. The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies. Psychology Press. Google-Books-ID: qmSySHvIy5IC.
  32. Camille Harris Amber Gayle Johnson Sadie Palmer Diyi Yang and Amy Bruckman. 2023. "Honestly I Think TikTok has a Vendetta Against Black Creators": Understanding Black Content Creator Experiences on TikTok. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 7 CSCW2 (Sept. 2023) 1–31. 10.1145/3610169 · DOI
  33. Mar Hicks. 2019. Hacking the Cis-tem: Transgender Citizens and the Early Digital State. IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 41 1 (Jan. 2019) 20–33. 10.1109/MAHC.2019.2897667 · DOI
  34. Martin Hähnel Sabine Pfeiffer and Stephan Graßmann. 2024. Striking the balance: ethical challenges and social implications of AI-induced power shifts in healthcare organizations. AI & SOCIETY (Aug. 2024). 10.1007/s00146-024-02043-6 · DOI
  35. Channarong Intahchomphoo and Odd Erik Gundersen. 2020. Artificial Intelligence and Race: a Systematic Review. Legal Information Management 20 2 (June 2020) 74–84. 10.1017/S1472669620000183 · DOI
  36. 10.1145/3491102.3517533 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Sonia K. Katyal and Jessica Y. Jung. 2021. The Gender Panopticon: AI Gender and Design Justice. UCLA Law Review 68 (2021) 692. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/uclalr68&id=709&div=&collection=
  38. 10.1145/3461702.3462605 · DOI
  39. Helen Kennedy, Susan Oman, Mark Taylor, Jo Bates, and Robin Steedman. 2020. Public understanding and perceptions of data practices: a review of existing research. Technical Report. Living With Data, University of Sheffield. http://livingwithdata.org/current-research/publications/
  40. 10.1145/3544548.3581340 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.1145/3411764.3445570 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Haochen Liu Yiqi Wang Wenqi Fan Xiaorui Liu Yaxin Li Shaili Jain Yunhao Liu Anil Jain and Jiliang Tang. 2023. Trustworthy AI: A Computational Perspective. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology 14 1 (Feb. 2023) 1–59. 10.1145/3546872 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Naresh K. Malhotra Sung S. Kim and James Agarwal. 2004. Internet Users’ Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC): The Construct the Scale and a Causal Model. Information Systems Research 15 4 (Dec. 2004) 336–355. 10.1287/isre.1040.0032 · DOI · Paper page
  44. Hideyuki Matsumi and Daniel J. Solove. 2025. The Prediction Society: AI and the Problems of Forecasting the Future. University of Illinois Law Review 2025 1 (2025) 1–62. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/unilllr2025&i=1
  45. 10.1145/3630106.3658907 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Colleen McClain, Emily A Vogels, Andrew Perrin, Stella Sechopoulos, and Lee Rainie. 2021. The Internet and the Pandemic. Technical Report. Pew Research Center.
  47. Jennifer Mickel. 2024. Racial/Ethnic Categories in AI and Algorithmic Fairness: Why They Matter and What They Represent. 10.48550/arXiv.2404.06717arXiv:https://arXiv.org/abs/2404.06717 [cs]. · DOI
  48. Sarah Myers West, Meredith Whittaker, and Kate Crawford. 2019. Discriminating Systems: Gender, Race, and Power in AI. Technical Report. AI Now Institute. https://ainowinstitute.org/publication/discriminating-systems-gender-race-and-power-in-ai-2
  49. Mariano Méndez-Suárez Delbello Luca de Vega de Unceta Alejandro and Ana Lucia Ortega Larrea. 2024. Factors Affecting Consumers’ Attitudes Towards Artificial Intelligence. Journal of Promotion Management 30 7 (Oct. 2024) 1141–1158. 10.1080/10496491.2024.2367203Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2024.2367203. · DOI
  50. 10.21627/9781503641365 · DOI
  51. Lisa-Maria Neudert, Aleksi Knuutila, and Philip N Howard. 2020. Global Attitudes Towards AI, Machine Learning & Automated Decision Making: Implications for Involving Artificial Intelligence in Public Service and Good Governance. Technical Report. Oxford Commission on AI & Good Governance, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford.
  52. 10.18574/nyu/9781479833641.001.0001 · DOI
  53. Ekaterina Novozhilova Kate Mays and James E. Katz. 2024. Looking towards an automated future: U.S. attitudes towards future artificial intelligence instantiations and their effect. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 11 1 (Jan. 2024) 1–11. 10.1057/s41599-024-02625-1Publisher: Palgrave. · DOI
  54. Hannah Overbye-Thompson Kristy A Hamilton and Dana Mastro. 2024. Reinvention mediates impacts of skin tone bias in algorithms: implications for technology diffusion. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 29 5 (Sept. 2024) zmae016. 10.1093/jcmc/zmae016 · DOI
  55. Spencer Overton. 2024. Overcoming Racial Harms to Democracy from Artificial Intelligence. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=4754903
  56. Matthew R O’Shaughnessy Daniel S Schiff Lav R Varshney Christopher J Rozell and Mark A Davenport. 2023. What governs attitudes toward artificial intelligence adoption and governance? Science and Public Policy 50 2 (April 2023) 161–176. 10.1093/scipol/scac056 · DOI
  57. 10.1145/3605098.3635935 · DOI
  58. 10.1145/3593013.3594134 · DOI
  59. Neil Richards and Woodrow Hartzog. 2021. A Duty of Loyalty for Privacy Law. Washington University Law Review 99 3 (2021) 961–1022. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/walq99&i=979
  60. Cami Rincón Os Keyes and Corinne Cath. 2021. Speaking from Experience: Trans/Non-Binary Requirements for Voice-Activated AI. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5 CSCW1 (April 2021) 132:1–132:27. 10.1145/3449206 · DOI
  61. 10.1145/3544548.3580950 · DOI
  62. Abdul Rohman and Diem-Trang Vo. 2024. “To us it is still foreign”: AI and the disabled in the Global South. AI & Society (Dec. 2024). 10.1007/s00146-024-02149-x · DOI
  63. Jacob Owusu Sarfo Gloria Tachie-Donkor Esi Kyirba Aggrey and Prince Mordi. 2024. Attitudes Perceptions and Challenges Towards Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Ghana and Nigeria: A Systematic Review with a Narrative Synthesis. International Journal of Media & Information Literacy 9 2 (Dec. 2024) 437–452. 10.13187/ijmil.2024.2.437Publisher: Cherkas Global University Press. · DOI
  64. Morgan Klaus Scheuerman Kandrea Wade Caitlin Lustig and Jed R. Brubaker. 2020. How We’ve Taught Algorithms to See Identity: Constructing Race and Gender in Image Databases for Facial Analysis. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 4 CSCW1 (May 2020) 058:1–058:35. 10.1145/3392866 · DOI · Paper page
  65. 10.1145/3173574.3173889 · DOI
  66. 10.1145/3544548.3581017 · DOI
  67. 10.4324/9781315883700-5 · DOI
  68. 10.1145/3600211.3604673 · DOI · Paper page
  69. Cornelia Sindermann Peng Sha Min Zhou Jennifer Wernicke Helena S. Schmitt Mei Li Rayna Sariyska Maria Stavrou Benjamin Becker and Christian Montag. 2021. Assessing the Attitude Towards Artificial Intelligence: Introduction of a Short Measure in German Chinese and English Language. KI - Künstliche Intelligenz 35 1 (March 2021) 109–118. 10.1007/s13218-020-00689-0 · DOI · Paper page
  70. Mae Sosto and Alberto Barrón-Cedeño. 2024. QueerBench: Quantifying Discrimination in Language Models Toward Queer Identities. 10.48550/arXiv.2406.12399arXiv:https://arXiv.org/abs/2406.12399 [cs]. · DOI
  71. María T. Soto-Sanfiel Ibiti Adriana Machado Mabel Marín Ochoa Beatriz Elena Mendoza Michilot María Rosell Arce Claudio Guillermo and Ariadna Angulo-Brunet. 2022. In Search of the Global South: Assessing Attitudes of Latin American Journalists to Artificial Intelligence in Journalism. Journalism Studies 23 10 (July 2022) 1197–1224. 10.1080/1461670X.2022.2075786Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2022.2075786. · DOI
  72. František Sudzina. 2015. Do gender and personality traits (BFI-10) influence self-perceived tech savviness?. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Information Technology for Practice. https://www.cssi-morava.cz/new/doc/IT2015/sbornik.pdf#page=93
  73. 10.18653/v1/P19-1159 · DOI · Paper page
  74. 10.1145/3706598.3713510 · DOI · Paper page
  75. Shari Trewin Sara Basson Michael Muller Stacy Branham Jutta Treviranus Daniel Gruen Daniel Hebert Natalia Lyckowski and Erich Manser. 2019. Considerations for AI fairness for people with disabilities. AI Matters 5 3 (Dec. 2019) 40–63. 10.1145/3362077.3362086 · DOI · Paper page
  76. 10.18653/v1/2023.findings-acl.502 · DOI
  77. David Vogel. 1997. Trading up and governing across: transnational governance and environmental protection. Journal of European Public Policy 4 4 (Dec. 1997) 556–571. 10.1080/135017697344064Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/135017697344064. · DOI
  78. Meredith Whittaker, Meryl Alper, Cynthia Bennett, Sara Hendren, Liz Kaziunas, Mara Mills, Meredith Ringel Morris, Joy Rankin, Emily Rogers, Marcel Salas, and Sarah Myers West. 2019. Disability, Bias, and AI. Technical Report. AI Now Institute, New York University. https://ainowinstitute.org/publication/disabilitybiasai-2019
  79. 10.1145/3706598.3713842 · DOI
  80. Philip Fei Wu Charlotte Summers Arjun Panesar Amit Kaura and Li Zhang. 2024. AI Hesitancy and Acceptability—Perceptions of AI Chatbots for Chronic Health Management and Long COVID Support: Survey Study. JMIR Human Factors 11 1 (July 2024) e51086. 10.2196/51086Company: JMIR Human Factors Distributor: JMIR Human Factors Institution: JMIR Human Factors Label: JMIR Human Factors Publisher: JMIR Publications Inc. Toronto Canada. · DOI
  81. Shiyu Yang Nicole M. Krause Luye Bao Mikhaila N. Calice Todd P. Newman Dietram A. Scheufele Michael A. Xenos and Dominique Brossard. 2023. In AI We Trust: The Interplay of Media Use Political Ideology and Trust in Shaping Emerging AI Attitudes. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly (Sept. 2023) 10776990231190868. 10.1177/10776990231190868Publisher: SAGE Publications Inc. · DOI
  82. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197579329.013.36 · DOI
  83. Baobao Zhang and Allan Dafoe. 2019. Artificial Intelligence: American Attitudes and Trends. Technical Report. Center for the Governance of AI, Future of Humanity Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=3312874
  84. Zhan Zhang Yegin Genc Aiwen Xing Dakuo Wang Xiangmin Fan and Daniel Citardi. 2020. Lay individuals’ perceptions of artificial intelligence (AI)-empowered healthcare systems. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology 57 1 (2020) e326. 10.1002/pra2.326_eprint: https://asistdl.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/pra2.326. · DOI
  85. Longxuan Zhao. 2024. Algorithmic camouflage: Exploring the shadowbans imposed by algorithms to moderate the content of Chinese gay men. Big Data & Society 11 4 (Dec. 2024) 20539517241296037. 10.1177/20539517241296037Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd. · DOI
  86. 10.1145/3613904.3642210 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Haimson, O. L., Mayworm, S. R., Ingber, A. S., & Andalibi, N.
Venue
Proceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency
Publisher
ACM
Published
2025-06-23
Pages
1224-1237
DOI
10.1145/3715275.3732081
Cited by
25
References
15
Licence
www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Background (vor)
Funders
National Science Foundation (2236674)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review