AI on the Battlefield? Revisiting Public Support for LAWs

Why do citizens support the development of lethal autonomous weapons (LAWs)? In this paper, we revisit the claim that support for taboo weapons is driven by the logic of external threats, now that individuals are more familiar with artificial intelligence and the international environment has grown more uncertain. In our study, we probe public attitudes toward both the development of LAWs and international cooperation to address the risks. Based on original survey data from 2,500 respondents in the US, we provide an observational as well as an experimental analysis. Observationally, general support for AI and favorable views of militarism and US hegemony as well as perceived competition from other countries are highly correlated with support for the use of lethal AI-weapons. Experimentally, we show that information that rivals or allies are already developing such weapons increases support for LAWs. Additionally, we find that competition from other countries does not influence support for global cooperation to limit AI on the battlefield. Overall, our analysis supports the idea that concerns for security have the power to override opposition to these taboo weapons.