News

Over the past two years, there has been a significant increase in the number of people across the globe who perceive the value of market research, both as consumers and citizens. This is according to new findings from the Global Research Business Network’s (GRBN) Global Trust Survey 2024.

The research shows that the overall trust placed in market research organisations by the general public remains positive.  The net trust score* for the sector is +7, matching the level in 2022, when the survey was last undertaken.

The GRBN’s Global Trust Survey reports on public trust in organisations worldwide, with participants in the UK, Australia, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, Germany and Spain.

The survey, however, also highlights potential risks to the reputation of the market research sector, including AI.

People across the globe have concerns over AI technologies, and companies providing AI tools are seen as some of the least trusted organisations globally.  Just 17% of survey participants claim that they trust them, and 36% report that they do not.  This puts their net trust score at -19*, higher only than media companies (-22) and social media firms (-31).

Market research companies have embraced AI technology to deliver cost effective and efficient insights to clients.  While the sector will continue to leverage AI tools to empower customer and citizen-centric decision-making, it must be transparent with research participants about how these technologies are being used.

If not, the survey indicates that trust in research sector could decline.  A global average of 47% of people see the use of AI as negatively impacting the level of trust they place in market research companies. This compares with 32% who say it has no effect, and the 10% who say it has a positive influence.

The negative impact of AI use on market research’s reputation is particularly pronounced in New Zealand, where it decreases trust for 63%, and Australia, where it is a detractor for 57%.

The responsible collection and use of data also provides a reputational risk to the sector, as the vast majority of the general public remains highly concerned about the misuse of personal information.  The level of trust with how different organisations are using personal information is on balance negative – and has declined since 2022.

The market research sector is no exception in this regard, according to the GRBN’s survey.  The level of faith placed in insights firms to use data responsibly has declined from a net trust index of -18 in 2022 to -23 in 2024.

Debrah Harding, GRBN chair and managing director of MRS, comments: “As researchers make increasing use of AI to streamline and enhance our work, we must be alive to the impacts this might have on the way we are perceived.  There is a real opportunity for us to reinforce research’s value to the public, and to do that we must prioritise ethical best practice when utilizing new technologies – and communicate how we’re doing this.”

Andrew Cannon, executive director at GRBN, says: “As well as clouds, this year’s Global Trust Survey also brings news of silver linings to the research sector.  The public’s confidence in the positive impact insights can make on all areas of life is clearly growing – and rightly so.”

The full GRBN Global Trust Survey report is available to download here: https://grbn.org/trust-2024

Ends

Notes to Editors

*The net trust score is calculated as the difference between the percentage of participants who report trusting and the percentage of those who report not trusting organisations.

The results cited in this press release are based on the responses of 9563 people aged 18+ living in Australia, Canada, Germany, Korea, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Spain, the UK and the USA, who completed online surveys in February 2024. The responses reflect the 18+ year old population in each country in terms of age, sex and region.

About GRBN

Global Research Business Network connects 45 research associations and over 3500 research businesses on six continents.

More than US$25 billion in annual research revenues (turnover) are generated by these

By Melanie Courtright, Insights Association

Here in the U.S., we were pleased to see rays of optimism rippling through the findings of the 2024 Global Trust Survey. These are areas we can explore, learn from, and build upon. Let’s dive in.

First, it was encouraging to see that the U.S. bucked the global trend of growing distrust in organizations. Americans were the only group in the international survey to increase their trust level in organizations of all sorts – albeit a modest 5% up to 20%. This carried through to our industry. Those in the U.S. who believe market research benefits them grew by 6% during the past two years and now sits at 56%. We believe this area – proving to consumers the value of what we do to help them in their everyday lives – is deserving of more attention.

Personal, Meaningful Relationships with Consumers
Insights, done properly and inclusively, provide citizens with a voice. Those of us in the business understand this, but the general population is largely unaware. Recently though, as brands invest in making more meaningful, personal connections with consumers, we’re seeing greater understanding and appreciation that this is indeed a two-way relationship. We’re seeing this build at the grassroots level in highly visible ways via popular influencers who work closely with brands on Instagram and TikTok. They illuminate how consumers can sway brands in their messaging, advocacy, UX, and improving access to the process.

AI: A Double-edged Sword
Integrating AI into the insights process may be a time saver, but it may also be a trust deflator. Nearly half of respondents said that the use of AI by market research companies decreases their trust in that company, specifically noting the use of AI chatbots and avatars for online interviews. Only 13% said it increases their trust. The fact that companies providing AI tools have among the lowest trust levels (25%, compared to banks, which have the highest at 60%) should be noted as a cautionary data point. It is imperative that organizations emphasize the human touch in research and create and communicate clear policies on the use of AI in their work. IA is working on an AI policy that will focus on, among other things, duty of care, transparency, and quality. Such guidelines – at an industry and company level – will bring clarity, understanding, and trust.

Data Privacy
There continues to be widespread distrust in how industries, including market research, handle personal data. Close to 30% of U.S.-based survey respondents don’t know how their data is collected and used in a market research setting. This underscores the need for transparency and effective communication and notification. On the regulatory front, IA continues to urge Congress to adopt a national data privacy law to bring consistency and eliminate the confusing patchwork of state laws. We’re also stepping up our efforts to promote the IA Code of Standards, which is featured as a learning module on our new education platform.

Participant Satisfaction
While the report indicates that satisfaction in the survey process is steady, we are not content. Satisfaction levels have been too low for far too long and we are determined to improve them. Criticism of long surveys continues. Here, AI enhancements can help.

There are numerous other contributing factors and we are working to address them. At the Insights Association’s Annual Conference in April, we asked attendees to help us co-develop a Participant Bill of Rights and to work on policies to guide the proper and ethical use of AI. The engagement was enthusiastic and rigorous; the results of the brainstorms incredibly productive and valuable. In the coming months, IA’s Standards Committee will move these ideas forward and develop supplements to our Code. Then it will be time to activate these best practices across the industry. I hope we can count on you to help with implementation. Only with your adoption can we move the needle on trust – in this report and across society.

Melanie Courtright, Insights Association

 

 

 

 

 

By Debrah Harding, The Market Research Society (MRS)

At a time when the sector is struggling against a tide of fake data, fraudulent participants and bot technologies, which are affecting research data quality and integrity, the need to protect and encourage real participants has never been so important. The success of research relies upon the ability of the sector to engage and encourage members of the public to become participants.  Without trust, the sector will struggle to attract participants and the future of research becomes very bleak indeed.

Whilst it is encouraging that in the UK the value market research brings to business is recognized, there is still more to be done to improve the value recognition by individuals.  Part of this will be about improving the participant experience when contributing to research, but other factors such as assurances about data protection and data security are equally important.

The UK research sector is renowned for its innovation, and it is without doubt one of the key strengths of the UK research sector.

However, the profession must also be cognizant of the impact that some of the new technologies may have on the perception of their activities.  The GRBN Trust Survey results show that in the UK there are low levels of trust in data analytics, social media and AI; and all of these techniques are part of the researcher’s toolkit.  But there is also evidence from other research undertaken in the UK, that when these tools are used for purposes perceived as beneficial to the public, such as using AI for cancer detection, the public becomes more comfortable; with the caveat that the majority would like to see laws and regulations guiding the use of such technologies.

For the research sector, if AI and related technologies are used without consideration for ethics, the output from AI can amplify and emphasize human biases which could result in harm to individuals, business, and society and could ultimately damage the research sector itself.  Conversely, if AI and related technologies are positively managed by researchers, with ethical principles, which protect and inform participants at the core, the potential of the technology’s possibilities can be maximised.

In the UK, MRS has developed comprehensive guidance setting out how practitioners can act legally and ethically when using AI and related technologies.  Within the MRS Code of Conduct there are 12 ethical principles which underpin all rules and requirements within the Code. Within the new MRS guidance Using AI and Related Technologies the 12 Code principles have been applied to the use of AI and related technologies in all its forms.

In the UK this is the first step to keep a abreast of this rapidly evolving policy area, particularly as legal and regulatory frameworks develop around the world.

The research sector needs to adopt AI and related technologies in a measured, legal, ethical and privacy-first way to ensure that the sector harnesses the benefits whilst mitigating the risk. As a sector, research relies upon the confidence of clients, users and participants in the value of what we deliver.  To continue to retain that confidence, we need to put participants first and safeguard their confidence to support our activities.

Debrah Harding, The Market Research Society (MRS)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By David Rothstein, RTi Research

Trust is not a new concept.  Trust is, always has been, and always will be vital to any transaction in any industry.  Without trust, business simply cannot be done.

As Stephen M. R. Covey eloquently explained in his 2006 book “The Speed of Trust”, with trust comes greater speed and efficiency, reduced transaction costs, increased innovation and creativity, and improved customer loyalty and employee engagement.

GRBN’s Global Trust Survey assesses the level of trust associated with our market research industry, and therefore provides an important measure of the efficiency at which we can work.  Or said another way, a measure of the friction we are working against.  The higher the trust, the lower the friction.

It is heartening to see that market research is more trustworthy than other industries like government (sadly) and social media companies (not surprisingly).  At the same time, it is frustrating to see how little we are trusted among the public on an absolute basis (30% trust us).

We’ve got to do better. Compared to the other industries included in this research, and considering that 43% of respondents are unsure about us (vs. 23% distrust), there is plenty of room for us to run.

For starters, it’s clear the greatest concern and mistrust among respondents is how their personal data is handled (or how they perceive it is handled). We must continue to “do the right thing” for our respondents, protecting their personal data, and not using it in any way inconsistent with their expectations, or outside the various industry association codes of standards and ethics.

Next, surely we can improve the way we interact with respondents. We can create more engaging surveys, eliminate long screening questionnaires, ask smarter questions that make sense to consumers, and generally treat our respondents with the respect they deserve.

Lastly, we must be thoughtful and cautious about our use of AI. When AI is incorporated into market research practices, it negatively impacts trust in market research companies (net trust index falls from +7 to -37). Consumers are highly skeptical about the use of AI in market research, including tools as seemingly innocuous as using AI chatbots or avatars in the online interview. To maintain trust, we must tread lightly and intelligently.

Perhaps the most satisfying finding in the entire study is that the personal benefit consumers believe they receive from market research has increased – across every country! Let’s ensure we can continue that trend by doing the hard work of building a greater level of trust with our constituents and stakeholders. Above all else, let’s be sure not to squander our greatest asset.

David Rothstein, RTi Research

By DR. Otto Hellwig, BILENDI

The 2022 version of the "Global Trust Survey" has been recognised in the German research community. The tenor was ambivalent. On the one hand, Germany ranks fourth internationally in terms of trust in market research. On the other hand, trust in us market researchers is rather average compared to other professional groups. For example, we market researchers only achieve tenth place worldwide in the ranking of professional groups surveyed for our handling of personal data, far behind bankers and politicians. Nevertheless, Germany is in 5th place in the national comparison.

However, it would be deceptive to believe that we in Germany should rest on our laurels. A recently published study by a public broadcaster on Germans' trust in their institutions shows that Germans are continuing to lose their trust. The reasons for this are complex. One possible cause is the growing economic pessimism among the population. In times of increasing crises and uncertainty, people are losing trust in institutions such as the economy, politics and the media. Market research will also be affected by this.

So how should we market researchers take the initiative to remain trustworthy in the future and what have we already initiated in Germany in particular to strengthen trust in market research? Market research is not only dependent on the trust of the population. The trust of its clients and study participants is also important for its work and its success. The "Global Trust Survey" is an instrument for measuring the public's trust in our actions. Other studies should complement this compass. Bilendi & respondi therefore regularly asks its own study participants about their experiences in the studies and their satisfaction as participants. This picture should also be supplemented by constant feedback from our clients.

Trust is gained by strengthening the foundations of market research and communicating this well. Scientific standards, data protection and the separation of research and non-research activities are the guard rails that should guide our journey. However, these cornerstones are not static, they evolve and must therefore be continuously reviewed and adjusted. In line with the definition, compliance with these foundations must be ensured.

In Germany, the market research associations have recently fundamentally revised their quality assurance standards in order to adapt them to a changed research landscape. Compliance with these standards is monitored by a strict system of self-regulation, headed by the German Market and Social Research Council. However, trust is only created when this constellation of standards and self-regulation is communicated to the population. In Germany, the associations have launched an initiative with this aim, which regularly communicates the aims and methods of market research through various channels. Bilendi & respondi not only supports this initiative financially. The best way to strengthen the trust of the people who take part in our studies is to focus on their research experience and try to optimise it. This is a challenge that requires all players within the industry to take action.

Trust is not a given and can be influenced by the industry. The "Global Trust Survey" is the right feedback and a good compass for this challenge. For this reason, it will continue to be supported by Bilendi & respondi.

DR. Otto Hellwig, BILENDI

By John Tabone, Canadian Research Insights Council

As an industry, we have long recognized that gaining the trust of participants is critical to the work that we do.  We rely on the honest opinions of participants to deliver the insights that can help organizations enhance the programs, products and services they offer.

That is why growing trust with participants is fundamental to our standards.  Our standards require researchers to be transparent with participants on how we will use the information we collect,  to always protect the personal information from unauthorized access and to always behave ethically and avoid anything that could harm a research participant or our industry’s reputation.

The findings of the GRBN Global Trust Survey 2024 demonstrate that the Canadian industry continues to have a net positive trust score of 21, well above the global average.  It is also trending up 3 points since the 2022.  The survey also found that the majority of Canadian continue to perceive market research as beneficial.

While the findings are generally positive, the remains significant opportunity to do better.  The 2024 survey also highlight concerns regarding the use of AI and concerns about data protection as major risks to trust moving forward.  The survey found that, for a majority of Canadians, incorporating AI into market research practices negatively impacts trust.  The survey also found that trust in Market Research Companies to Protect and Appropriately Use Personal Data was low with a net trust index of -8 (though an 8 point improvement over 2022).  Given these concerns, it is more critical than ever that we continue to enhance our efforts to increase trust.

In Canada, the CRIC AI Committee is already working to develop guidelines to ensure the responsible and ethical use of AI tools by CRIC member companies.

CRIC also offers privacy and information security toolkits to help ensures its members have the policies and procedures to protect the personal information of Canadian.  And the CRIC accreditation program includes a strong emphasis on privacy and information security in addition to research practice.

While having strong standards and compliance with those standards is essential, it is also critical that Canadian understand the protection those standards offers and can differentiate CRIC member companies that follow those standards from other companies that do not adhere to these standards.  That is why CRIC created the CRIC Pledge to Canadians and the CRIC Research Verification Service.

The CRIC Pledge to Canadians highlights 10 key commitments that CRIC member agencies make to Canadians in simple and clear language.  These commitments not only convey some of key aspects of our standards but also serve as way for Canadians to differentiate requests from CRIC member agencies from other companies that do not adhere to the same standards.

One of the commitments is for CRIC members to register all projects with Canadians in the CRIC Research Verification Service.  The CRIC Research Verification Services provides a service for Canadians to confirm the legitimacy of research they are invited to participate in and also to submit questions or concerns with respect to the research.

Our efforts to grow trust have allowed us to maintain a net positive trust score with Canadians.  As our industry leverages more AI based tools, we must continue our efforts to grow trust with Canadians.

John Tabone, Canadian Research Insights Council

By Neil Cantle, Rakuten Insight

For a reputable panel company, gaining and maintaining trust from all stakeholders, clients and panel members, is and has always been critical. In 2024, the presence of AI continues to grow. In our daily lives, proving our humanity when making an online purchase has become the norm. So, it is little wonder that the humanity of market research data is also questioned. As AI grows more sophisticated, so do the defences against the bots in an endless game of cat and mouse. In this context, Rakuten Insight will take an in-depth look at how reputable panel companies gain and maintain trust, not just from the client point of view but also from the point of view of panel members who complete surveys.

For a panel company, securing and maintaining the trust of panel members is critical to the business. Without trust, there would be no members to complete research surveys. In Japan, trust is particularly difficult to gain and easy to lose. There is a cultural mix of high expectations, high attention to detail and one of the most sophisticated customer service markets in the world. As such, panel companies operating in Japan have developed and adopted many actions into daily workflows to maintain trust. '

In Japan, prior to registration, the panel company's brand name is the first point of reassurance. It is a common goal for research agencies to get their brand name into the mainstream media. This brand name provides panel members with enough trust to take the first step. Registration then offers panellists double opt-in as well as clear communication of how their personal data will be protected and used. Japanese consumers generally appreciate this additional reassurance on what they can expect by being a member, what incentives they can expect and how those incentives can be used. There is a cultural expectation to be provided with more information rather than less. The additional information reassures more than if the information is quick and easy to understand. Once a member has signed up to a panel, it is essential that promises are adhered to and expectations are met, in order to maintain the trust.

The next key touchpoint in maintaining the trust of panel members is when they are invited to take a survey. Prior to any survey being conducted, reputable panel companies usually sends a message to panellists so the member always knows the survey topic and the incentive they will receive. In addition, the survey is always checked prior to being sent to members, so that, if required, any message can be tailored.

For example, panel members would be alerted to any surveys which contain questions on sensitive topics, political viewpoints or data privacy.  These messages maintain a neutral tone to avoid any influence on the data, but the messages are key in showing the company cares and building trust.

Once entering the survey, translation is key for panel members in Japan. Badly translated questionnaires can damage trust, providing the image that the company does not care what content goes before members. As such, locally based project managers review translations to ensure that surveys sent to panel members give not only the right meaning of the original but also the best impression of the professionalism of the company.

After the survey is completed, reputable panel companies help panel members in Japan to feel able to share any questions or concerns. Dealing with these inquiries, locally, speedily and professionally is critical to maintaining their trust.

Following the collection of the data, AI is increasingly used to ensure that the data is of the highest quality. As the attacks on the humanity of the data increase, so do the sophistication of the defences. Available security technologies, as elsewhere, are employed in Japan to ensure the highest quality of data is provided to clients. Gaining and maintaining the trust of clients is essential.

In conclusion, trust is critical for reputable panel companies in Japan. Not only in terms of provision of quality data but also in terms of gaining and maintaining the trust of panel members, who are the basis of the research findings and of the actions that companies and brands take based on that data.

Neil Cantle, Rakuten Insight

 

By Greg Matheson, Quest Mindshare

One of the metrics applied to the global trust survey centers on LOI. The findings here are not a surprise and have been consistent over time.  In Canada, approximately half of respondents surveyed find surveys too long.  About half of people surveyed also have a general mistrust of market research companies.  While not necessarily linked, none of this should be surprising to anyone.

These are all ‘knowns’ in our space, otherwise known as the insights industry.  The biggest question researchers should be asking themselves is how does that dissatisfaction with length of survey impact the quality of data collected?  Ultimately impacting decisions being made from that very data. That, to me, should be paramount to anyone designing a survey.

And there is an impact, and it’s very real!

A few years ago, our researchers at Quest Mindshare set out to find a data degradation factor.  Essentially understand how Length of Interview impacts data quality and what factor – call it a data degradation factor, they could apply.

The results were telling across over seven thousand respondents. Here we have cross sections of engagement time at certain timed intervals.  Better engagement means better data:

In short, LOI certainly has an impact on engagement and engagement has an impact on data quality.  While we are not yet at a point where we can apply a degradation factor, we are getting closer. What we do know is that the first 3-4 minutes are prime time and then attention wanes, sometimes dramatically.  Pro tip: Don’t waste prime time with unnecessary screening questions!

Fighting long surveys has been a tale as old as time.  I’ve been doing this since 1996, so that time is, well, a lot of time… And no, I don’t expect that to change but having a metric to understand the value of data when asked t certain timing intervals is a priority for us and it should be for you too.

In the meantime, lets improve trust in not only how respondents view us, but how users of our data trust our data.  For more specifics on this RoR, check out questmindshare.com or reach out and any of our team members would be happy to help.

Greg Matheson, Quest Mindshare

By Angus Hunter, The Research Society

Trust is the cornerstone of market and social research.  Trust is both a foundational principle and a critical operational element that influences the reliability and validity of data gathered. This importance is multifaceted, impacting research participants, the research community, our clients and the broader public.

At the core of trust in research is the ethical conduct expected of researchers. This involves obtaining informed consent, ensuring confidentiality, and handling data with integrity. When participants believe that their personal information is safe and that the research is conducted ethically, they are more likely to participate willingly and provide accurate, honest responses. This trust is not merely ethical but practical; it directly affects the quality and depth of data collected.

Additionally, public trust in market research affects how research findings are received and acted on, particularly in the government and social context. Trust in the research community encourages engagement with findings and greater acceptance of evidence-based policy changes.

As we increasingly integrate artificial intelligence and synthetic data into market research, the need for trust becomes even more pronounced and the importance of GRBN’s study is amplified. AI and synthetic data offer the potential to vastly expand the scope and efficiency of research by generating insights from large data sets at unprecedented speeds. However, these technologies also introduce new complexities and ethical considerations.

Furthermore, the use of synthetic data, while valuable for protecting privacy and enhancing data availability, raises questions about the authenticity and representativeness of the information. Ensuring that synthetic data sets are truly reflective of real-world populations requires meticulous validation and testing, which must be transparently communicated to maintain credibility. The risk of biases being encoded into AI systems or perpetuated by synthetic datasets is a significant concern that researchers must actively manage.

The propensity for AI to negatively impact trust in the research industry here in Australia is evidenced in the report findings. As market research continues to evolve with these technological advancements, establishing robust ethical guidelines and maintaining transparency in AI and data synthesis processes are crucial. Trust in this context not only supports the integrity and acceptance of research findings but also safeguards against the misuse of powerful technologies.

Building and maintaining this trust will require concerted efforts to educate stakeholders about AI and synthetic data methodologies, engage in open dialogue about the limitations and potential biases of these technologies, and implement rigorous oversight and ethical review processes.

These steps are essential to ensure that, as market research becomes more technologically advanced, it remains a reliable and trusted tool for decision-making.

The Research Society is pleased to continue its partnership with GRBN on this important work and we congratulate Andrew and his team on producing another thought-provoking study. We also take this opportunity to thank Lisa Salas and the team at Ovation for continuing to provide the fieldwork for this research here in Australia.

Angus Hunter, The Research Society

 

 

 

By Kendall Knight, Opinium

‘If’ and ‘when’ to ‘what’

‘If’ or ‘when’ are no longer the questions being asked about AI’s implementation in market research. AI is here and increasingly present in the day-to-day practices used to collect, handle and analyse data.

For consumers, the question therefore changes from ‘if’ and ‘when’, to ‘what’. Namely, ‘what does this mean for me and my data?’

Regardless of industry, the potential impact of AI on humans raises concern and the ‘what’ question becomes even more prominent. For market research, a sector in which just 1 in 5 consumers (19 %) trust the organisations within it to collect and process personal data and 76 % are concerned that their personal data might be misused, answering this question carefully is fundamental to keeping faith high.

This is more pressing still since it has come to light that nearly half (47 %) feel the use of AI in market research decreases their trust in the industry.

The problem presented for industry professionals is therefore a double-edged sword: AI is key to keep up with a rapidly changing landscape that demands efficiency, accuracy and automation of vast quantities of data. But it risks trust in market research practices and technology.

Promoting the education piece

Answering consumer questions and educating audiences on AI is essential to boost trust in market research processes and the industry itself. Problematically, promoting the benefits of AI and how it improves market research and data quality alone does not generally increase trust in the technology.

Upon seeing statements around the benefits of AI, trust in market research companies making these claims increased for just 16 % of respondents. These same statements also reduced levels of trust for more than 1 in 3 (35%) and stayed the same for another third (36%). Such statements ranged from the positive effects of AI on speed to tackling human-bias.

Adding the human touch

While we should continue promoting AI’s benefits, in tandem we must go back to the fundamentals, focusing on what AI really is and how it is used in order to remove fear of the unknown. After all, AI has become a buzzword largely devoid of meaning and it is easy to forget that it is a tool just like any other: it’s how humans utilise AI that makes it effective.

AI is a technology that uses algorithms to learn from large amounts of data, process patterns and produce its own findings based on this. That’s why in market research it can automate questions through chatbots, identify themes in vast data sets or conduct sentiment analysis on qualitative data.

However, the process still requires human input and perspective to provide nuance and industry-specific knowledge in a way that machine learning cannot. Market researchers must combine AI analysis with their own insight to give context to findings. It is human interpretation of AI that produces the most powerful results and tech alone should not be left to provide answers.

Humans also have the power to control data security risks that may come with AI and can put policies in place to quash threats that arise. Whether this is adding opt-in questions for respondents taking surveys that rely on AI, heightening GDPR regulations around the use of personal data during AI processes, or even ensuring that market research companies create rules around acceptable use cases for AI and what AI tools can be used during analysis.

Perhaps then, the first question that should be answered is not ‘what does AI mean for me and my data?’ but ‘what really is AI?’ and ‘how are humans utilising it?’. The key to building trust in AI and the research industry as whole is teaching that AI empowers us but only as long as we empower it.

Kendall Knight, Opinium