Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
ABSTRACT This paper reports on an audit study of generative AI systems (ChatGPT, Bing Chat, and Perplexity), which investigates how these new search engines construct responses and establish authority for topics of public importance. We collected system responses using a set of 48 authentic queries for 4 topics over 7 days, and analyzed the data using sentiment analysis, inductive coding, and source classification. Results provide an overview of the nature of system responses across these systems, and provide evidence of sentiment bias based on the queries and topics, and commercial and geographic biases in sources. The quality of sources used to support claims is uneven, relying heavily on News and Media, Business and Digital Media websites. Implications for system users emphasize the need to critically examine Generative AI system outputs when making decisions related to public interest and personal well‐being.
Li et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: