TAKEAWAYS
Optimism about artificial intelligence (AI) is growing, but so too is unease. While there is broad consensus that the technology brings significant benefits, concerns are mounting and confidence in institutions to govern AI use remains uneven around the world. Across different regions, Southeast Asia stands out as the most optimistic and trusting of their governments’ AI oversight, while the US and Europe are reporting lower expectations and heightened scepticism.
The trends are drawn from several large-scale studies of more than 30 countries between 2024 and 2026. They include research conducted by Ipsos, Pew Research Center, McKinsey, and the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HAI).
There are several notable findings.
1) The appeal of AI is clear
Respondents continue to associate AI with practical personal benefits, particularly time savings and entertainment. Globally, an Ipsos 2026 study reveals that 56% of respondents believe AI would reduce the amount of time it takes to get things done. A recent McKinsey report also bears out this pattern – 80% of respondents agree that AI has improved productivity, and 50% say it has helped them make better decisions.
AI usage is embraced at the workplace, but more so in emerging economies than advanced economies. According to the McKinsey report, 88% of organisations report regular AI use in at least one business function, and 58% of employees globally use AI on a semi-regular or regular basis. Adoption is highest in China, India, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates, where more than 80% of respondents turn to AI to simplify tasks. The US and Europe present lower adoption rates, reflecting slower scaling beyond the pilot phase.
2) Optimism comes with reservations
While AI products and services offer many benefits, not everyone is giving them the thumbs up. According to The Ipsos AI Monitor 2026, globally, half (50%) the respondents indicate that AI products and services make them nervous, a slight dip from 53% a year earlier.
Similar misgivings are particularly stark among the American public, reveals HAI’s AI Perceptions Gap Survey 2026. When asked about the impact of AI on how people do their jobs, 73% of US tech practitioners expect a positive impact; among the US public, however, the figure drops to just 23%. The divides are likewise reflected in their views about the economy (tech practitioners: 69%; public: 21%), and medical care (tech practitioners: 84%; public: 44%). In fact, the US has the largest discrepancy – 50 percentage points – between industry optimism and public scepticism.
3) Jobs remain a source of uncertainty
Respondents’ concerns are especially evident when people consider AI’s impact on employment. To a question about AI’s potential to make their job market or their own jobs better in the next five years, optimism on both measures stands at under or around 50%.
There are, however, considerable regional differences. China, Indonesia, Thailand and Singapore report more positive expectations around AI’s impact on jobs, both for them individually and on the economy. The US and EU are more sceptical that AI would make their jobs better.
For Singapore, the Ipsos report shows that the tension between the “wonder” of AI and “worry” about AI is a lingering sentiment – 58% of respondents report feeling anxious in both the 2025 and 2026 editions. Other reports suggest that the tension among Singapore respondents relate to broader concerns about job security, privacy issues and the economy, and not because they do not know how to navigate the AI processes.
4) Varying trust levels in AI governance
Alongside concerns about AI itself, there is a broader question of whether governments and institutions can be trusted to manage the technology responsibly.
Global trends reflect a long-term decline in trust in institutions, and there is a pervasive feeling that business leaders do not tell the truth. In the US, across all 50 states, concern about too little AI regulation outweighs concern about too much. Nationally, 41% of respondents say federal AI regulation will not go far enough, compared with 27% who say it will go too far; more than one third are unsure.
The US respondents also report the lowest trust in their own government to regulate AI responsibly, at just 31%. At the other end of the spectrum, Southeast Asian respondents express the greatest trust in their governments to regulate AI responsibly. Compared to the global average of 54%, Singapore respondents’ trust level in their government is 81% and Indonesia’s, 76%.
Separately, a 2025 Pew Research Center report on how people around the world view AI and governance finds that a median of 53% say they trust the EU to regulate AI responsibly; 37% trust the US, and 27% trust China. Trust in the EU varies widely among the organisation’s member nations – adults in Germany and Netherlands are the most trusting, while their counterparts in France, Greece, Italy and Poland are the least trusting.
5) The Singapore enigma
Singapore’s position illustrates the complexity of public attitudes towards AI. On the one hand, 58% of respondents report feeling anxious about AI. On the other, 81% trust the government to regulate AI responsibly, which is substantially above the global average of 54%.
This combination of anxiety and trust implies that unease about AI does not necessarily translate into distrust of the institutions overseeing its use. Singaporeans appear relatively receptive to AI while still recognising the risks that come with its growing adoption.
The research reveals broadly similar attitudes toward AI across the globe, but with noteworthy regional differences. People recognise the technology’s potential to save time, improve productivity and support better decisions, yet concerns about jobs, privacy and the wider economy remain.
For organisations, the challenge is therefore not to be overly single-minded in pushing for AI adoption. They also need to address the disquiet surrounding AI, as well as invest in developing employee capabilities while managing privacy concerns.
The real impact on the job market will ultimately depend on how organisations integrate AI into their workflows, and whether they can scale its use effectively. For governments, it means putting in place proper AI frameworks and instituting effective oversight, ensuring that AI is working as it should.
