Marvin OnumonuSeven in 10 (69%) people in the UK said they were worried about artificial intelligence’s (AI’s) impact on jobs and the economy, research from King’s College London (KCL) found.
Six in 10 said AI would take more jobs than it creates, and half (50%) said its impact would be worse than a normal recession.
One in five (22%) said AI could cause civil unrest.
56% agreed with Dario Amodei’s prediction that AI could eliminate half of all entry-level white-collar jobs within five years.
The study covered the general public, young people, university students and employers.
People were less concerned about AI affecting their own jobs, and some groups, like employers and male university students, were more positive about AI’s impact.
Half of the public (48%) said they would rather avoid AI, 41% said they were afraid of it, and only 24% thought it was positive for humanity.
More people said they would use AI in the future (43%) than not (26%).
Men, university students and male university students were more likely to say AI was positive for humanity.
Most parents had not discussed AI with their children, though three in 10 had talked about career implications or encouraged them to use AI tools.
Seven in 10 workers and nearly two thirds of employers said they worried about AI-driven job losses.
Most of the public (57%) said AI would lead to widespread unemployment.
Only 17% said AI would create as many or more jobs, while nearly half of employers (48%) were more optimistic.
One in five (22%) said AI would eliminate jobs fast enough to cause civil unrest, rising to a third (34%) among university students.
Most of the public (56%) and employers (59%) agreed with Amodei’s prediction about entry-level jobs.
Only a quarter of the public (25%) agreed with the World Economic Forum’s prediction that AI would create twice as many jobs as it displaces by 2030, although employers were more positive (47%).
Most said the economic benefits would go to wealthy investors and big companies, not workers or society.
Employers were excited about new job opportunities from AI, as were most university students, but only 35% of workers and 28% of the public felt the same.
Most workers were not worried about AI replacing their own job (55%), though one in five graduate workers (19%) were very worried.
People were more likely to think AI had affected other people’s thinking negatively (60%) than their own (27%).
Male university students were most confident AI was improving their ability to think for themselves (41%), while female university students were most likely to say it was worsening (46%).
Nearly nine in 10 students (89%) who used AI for their studies had encountered problems, mostly factual errors (37%) and made-up sources (31%), causing a serious or moderate problem for nearly half (45%).
Employers said AI was mainly assisting workers (56%), while the public said it was mainly replacing them (32%).
Almost half of workers who used AI (47%) said it made no real difference to their job, but nearly nine in 10 employers said they saw at least modest improvements in productivity.
A fifth of employers (22%) had already made roles redundant or reduced hiring because of AI, rising to nearly a third (29%) among large organisations.
Nearly two thirds of employers (64%) said investors, shareholders or senior leadership were encouraging them to use AI.
Despite AI’s growth, eight in ten current university students (78%) said they would still choose to do a degree, but three in ten (30%) would switch to a different subject.
People said schools (35%), the government (34%) and universities and colleges (26%) were most responsible for preparing young people for changes to work.
60% of university students said universities could prepare them for AI, but only a third (36%) said they were being prepared.
Only one in five (20%) agreed the educational system was preparing young people for a world shaped by AI.
Concern about AI-driven job losses was common.
A majority believed AI would eliminate far more jobs than it creates (57%).
One in five (22%) said AI would eliminate jobs fast enough to cause civil unrest, rising to a third (34%) among university students.
Half (50%) said the economic consequences would be worse than a normal recession.
University students were the most pessimistic (56%).
Looking ahead five years, nearly half (47%) expected AI would mainly replace workers, while employers expected it would mainly assist staff (49%).
Most groups predicted AI’s economic benefits would go to wealthy investors and large companies (65%).
Only a small minority (7%) expected the benefits to be shared fairly.
Despite concern, most workers (55%) said they were not worried about their own job being replaced by AI.
Graduate workers (45%) were more likely than non-graduates (34%) to be worried.
University students said AI would make the job market tougher by the time they graduate (60%).
Nearly a third (30%) said they would choose a different undergraduate degree due to AI.
Elena Simperl, director of the King’s Institute for Artificial Intelligence, KCL, said: “These findings tell us something important: the British public isn’t asking us to slow down on AI, they’re asking us to do it better.
“People want these tools, they want more of them, and they’ve used them enough to know where they fall short.
“Employers see creative thinking as the top benefit AI can offer, ahead of productivity, but the public and the experts both doubt that today’s tools deliver this.”
Simperl added: “That puts a real onus on those of us building and deploying AI to make systems that genuinely support learning, creativity, and critical thinking, and honestly, too few people in the sector are working seriously on this.
“Moreover, women seem to be more cautious about AI than men.
“That should make us ask who we are designing for, and who is being left out of the conversation.”
Bobby Duffy, director of the Policy Institute at KCL, said: “The public, workers, young people and university students are watching the rapid development of AI with more fear than excitement, with real concern for what it will do to jobs, particularly at entry levels, and, therefore, the prospects for our young people and the economy in general.
“This is perhaps no surprise when key figures, such as Anthropic’s CEO, Dario Amodei predicted that AI could eliminate half of all entry-level white-collar jobs within 5 years.
“Amodei has since painted a more optimistic picture of the labour market adapting and creating new opportunities.”
Duffy added: “However, the public are much less convinced about similar claims: only a quarter agree with the World Economic Forum that AI will create twice as many jobs globally as it will eliminate by 2030.
“This, therefore, is a vision that will need to be explained, and demonstrated, to the public.
“It is still early days, and our baseline study shows that many don’t yet have firm views or much direct experience of AI’s impact – but that’s likely to change quickly, and we’ll need to outline clear plans on how we will adapt and support people in the transition.”
He said: “On that, the public’s instinct is move more carefully, with the majority favouring regulation and protection of jobs over fast adoption, alongside clear government and employer-backed plans for retraining.
“People mostly look to the government, schools and universities to help our young people adapt, but there is clearly much more to do here: for example, while a majority of university students say their university can prepare them well for an AI-shaped job market, only 36% say they currently are being well prepared.”
Bouke Klein Teeselink, lecturer in philosophy, politics, and economics, King’s College London, said: “This survey gives a really interesting window into how British students, workers, and employers feel about AI.
“Some of the main concerns held by the public, such as fewer job openings, a contraction in entry-level roles, and increased pressure on white-collar work, echo what I find in my own research on AI and the UK labour market.
“But none of these effects is fixed. With the right training, policies, and institutional support, there is a clear path forward to a more hopeful future, with rising productivity, broader opportunity, higher incomes, and faster scientific progress.”
