Institutional Trust and the Domestic AI Advantage: Evidence from DeepSeek and ChatGPT Users in China
Public trust in generative artificial intelligence exhibits increasingly divergent patterns across national contexts, yet prevailing research largely overlooks the macro-structural forces underlying this divergence. This study argues that trust in AI is not merely a technical response to performance but a product of institutional refraction. We propose an ``Institutional Prism'' framework to demonstrate how institutional trust shapes user trust in domestic (DeepSeek) and global (ChatGPT) large l
Record details
Published: 31 May 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: unclassified
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Generative AI in Academic Writing: A Comparison of DeepSeek, Qwen, ChatGPT, Gemini, Llama, Mistral, and Gemma
OpenAlex · 30 April 2026
Can AI Make Conflicts Worse? An Alignment Failure in LLM Deployment Across Conflict Contexts
arXiv · 21 May 2026
PriHA: A RAG-Enhanced LLM Framework for Primary Healthcare Assistant in Hong Kong
arXiv · 10 April 2026
Are LLMs Ready for Computer Science Education? A Cross-Domain, Cross-Lingual and Cognitive-Level Evaluation Using Professional Certification Exams
arXiv · 8 April 2026
AI's Capability in Assisting Scientific Research in Physics, Astrophysics, and Cosmology II: Project Planning and Proposal Evaluation
arXiv cs.HC · 28 July 2026
The Performance of ChatGPT-4o and DeepSeek-R1 in Interpreting Thyroid Nodule Ultrasound Text Reports: Multicenter Study
JMIR (Journal of Medical Internet Research) · 28 July 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (31 May 2026), “Institutional Trust and the Domestic AI Advantage: Evidence from DeepSeek and ChatGPT Users in China,” evidence record 3341, https://ethics.ai/record/3341 (originally published by arXiv).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.