隨著人工智慧迅速從邊緣走向主流，美國約半數成年人已在使用AI聊天機器人，但社會對此技術的不安情緒也同步升高。史丹佛大學2025年的研究顯示，超過半數全球受訪者表示AI產品令他們感到緊張，較2022年的39%顯著上升。在西方國家尤其明顯，越來越多人像珠寶設計師瓦妮莎·瓦利爾科一樣，基於數據隱私、環境影響及對人類創造力的侵蝕等理由，堅決拒絕使用AI，這種抗拒甚至導致她與朋友和家人之間的關係出現裂痕。

AI的使用正逐漸成為一種價值觀的代理指標，深刻影響著人際關係與職場動態。卡內基梅隆大學倫理學教授德里克·萊本指出，驅使人們對持不同政治信念者產生敵意的心理機制，如今也開始塑造人們對AI的態度，職場中出現了所謂的「AI懷疑」現象。在創意產業，反AI情緒尤為強烈——沃頓商學院的研究發現，雖然ChatGPT能提升個人構想的品質，卻使群體產出的想法趨於同質化，削弱了突破性創新所需的多樣性。名人公開譴責AI，藝術家和作家則對AI公司提起版權訴訟。

許多大型企業正將AI使用納入員工考核，埃森哲和星巴克等公司甚至將升遷或獎金與AI使用掛鉤，這在擁抱技術者與抗拒者之間製造了新的職場裂痕。社會心理學家傑瑞米·波拉克認為，圍繞AI的分歧很少源於技術本身的功能，而是來自人們賦予它的道德意涵——「我們對一個工具的分歧」悄然演變為「他們不認同我的價值觀」。約會應用Hily的調查也顯示，多數Z世代和千禧世代表示不願與日常決策依賴AI的人約會，顯示AI立場正成為個人身份認同的一部分。

Artificial intelligence has surged from niche curiosity to mainstream fixture at remarkable speed, with roughly half of US adults now using AI chatbots and one in four relying on them daily. Yet this rapid adoption has bred widespread anxiety: a 2025 Stanford study found that over half of global respondents feel nervous about AI-powered products, up sharply from 39% in 2022. In Western nations especially, this unease has fueled a growing culture of refusal, exemplified by individuals like jewelry designer Vanessa Walilko, whose fierce opposition to AI—rooted in concerns about data privacy, environmental harm, and the erosion of creativity—has strained her relationships with friends and family.

For a growing number of people, attitudes toward AI are becoming intertwined with personal identity and moral values. Carnegie Mellon ethics professor Derek Leben observes that the psychological mechanisms driving political polarization are now shaping views on AI, spawning phenomena like 'AI suspicion' in the workplace. The backlash is particularly intense in creative fields: research from Wharton shows that while ChatGPT can enhance individual ideas, it homogenizes group output, undermining the diversity essential for innovation. Celebrities have publicly condemned AI, and artists and authors have filed copyright lawsuits against AI companies, reflecting deep-seated resentment across creative communities.

Corporate mandates are intensifying the divide, as companies like Accenture and Starbucks tie promotions and bonuses to AI adoption, leaving resistant employees feeling coerced and anxious about their futures. Social psychologist Jeremy Pollack argues that AI disagreements rarely stem from the technology's capabilities but from the moral significance people assign to it—disagreements about a tool quietly morph into judgments about shared values. Dating surveys reveal that majorities of Gen Z and millennial respondents would avoid partners who depend on AI for personal decisions, suggesting that one's stance on AI is increasingly functioning as a marker of identity. Pollack notes that those who navigate these tensions successfully prioritize the relationship over the argument, choosing curiosity over persuasion.