Claim LD01-SL-C25 (v1.0)
In a US online sample of 300 adults surveyed in July 2023, 67% attributed some possibility of conscious experience to ChatGPT; people who had used it gave higher ratings (mean 29.59 on a 1–100 scale) than those who had not (19.37).
Provenance and status
- Claim type
- Estimate
- Publication status
- Eligible for publication, with a qualifier
- Verification state
- Checked against the primary source. Who checked this claim is not recorded for it; claim checks so far were AI-led, and no person has checked claims against their sources.
- Does not license
- A finding about what the system is, or a causal effect of use on attribution
- Limitations
- One country, one time point, one system; the explanation given to participants may have shaped answers; the authors note the link between use and attribution could run either way; the survey did not ask whether people see the system as a tool or an agent
- Source (as cited)
- Colombatto & Fleming, “Folk psychological attributions of consciousness to large language models,” Neuroscience of Consciousness, 2024
- Source type
- Peer-reviewed journal article (recorded as “Peer-reviewed journal article”)
- Institutional position
- Independent academic (University of Waterloo and University College London)
- Maturity of the evidence
- Emerging evidence
- Recorded date
- 16 October 2026
- Currentness / correction
- This is the current version. No correction or concern is recorded on its sources.
Sources this version cites
Version
This page shows version v1.0. Its record never changes, even when newer evidence arrives; the site may add a note to the page or withhold a figure not cleared for public use.
This pinned version is also the current version.
Raw record: every recorded field, with its coded values
All 25 canonical Claim fields, verbatim, with the coded values derived from them. The plain-language labels above are read from these.
- Claim type (coded)
- ESTIMATE (as printed: “ESTIMATE”)
- Publication status (coded)
- ELIGIBLE (QUALIFIED) (as printed: “ELIGIBLE WITH QUALIFIER”)
- Verification state (coded)
- CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY
- Source type (coded)
- PEER_REVIEWED_JOURNAL_ARTICLE
- Maturity (coded)
- EMERGING
| # | Canonical field | Canonical value (verbatim) | Normalized (Claim Value Vocabulary v1.0.2) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CLAIM ID | LD01-SL-C25 | — |
| 2 | PUBLIC-FACING CLAIM | In a US online sample of 300 adults surveyed in July 2023, 67% attributed some possibility of conscious experience to ChatGPT; people who had used it gave higher ratings (mean 29.59 on a 1–100 scale) than those who had not (19.37). | — |
| 3 | CLAIM TYPE | ESTIMATE | base_types: ESTIMATE |
| 4 | RESEARCH STRAND | B — Evidence that could tell the accounts apart | — |
| 5 | MATURITY | EMERGING | states: EMERGING |
| 6 | SOURCE | Colombatto & Fleming, “Folk psychological attributions of consciousness to large language models,” Neuroscience of Consciousness, 2024 | source_ids: SRC-SL-COLOMBATTO-FLEMING-NEUROSCI-CONSCIOUSNESS-2024 |
| 7 | SOURCE TYPE | Peer-reviewed journal article | classes: PEER_REVIEWED_JOURNAL_ARTICLE |
| 8 | INSTITUTIONAL POSITION | Independent academic (University of Waterloo and University College London) | — |
| 9 | SCOPE | US adults recruited online, July 2023; ChatGPT | — |
| 10 | DESIGN | Online survey with ratings of consciousness and of 65 mental states | — |
| 11 | SAMPLE / DATASET | 300 adults with quotas for age and gender | — |
| 12 | MODEL / TOOL / VERSION | ChatGPT | — |
| 13 | COMPARATOR | Non-users; participants’ predictions of others’ views | — |
| 14 | MAIN RESULT | 33% said ChatGPT is definitely not an experiencer and 67% gave some possibility; ratings rose with frequency of use | — |
| 15 | INFERENTIAL TARGET | How lay people classify a chat assistant’s mind | — |
| 16 | DOES NOT LICENSE | A finding about what the system is, or a causal effect of use on attribution | — |
| 17 | VERIFICATION STATE | CONTENT VERIFIED | state: CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY · verified_by: UNKNOWN |
| 18 | LIMITATIONS | One country, one time point, one system; the explanation given to participants may have shaped answers; the authors note the link between use and attribution could run either way; the survey did not ask whether people see the system as a tool or an agent | — |
| 19 | CONTRADICTORY / SUPPORTING SOURCES | Not applicable | — |
| 20 | GEOGRAPHY / LANGUAGE | US / English | — |
| 21 | DISTRIBUTIONAL LEDGER | Not analysed in this claim | — |
| 22 | R01 / FIELD-MAP LINKS | LD-01, T4, D8 | — |
| 23 | WHAT WOULD CHANGE THIS CLAIM? | Surveys in other countries or later years with different attributions | — |
| 24 | PUBLICATION STATUS | ELIGIBLE WITH QUALIFIER | state: ELIGIBLE · qualifiers: QUALIFIED |
| 25 | RECORDED DATE | 2026-10-16 | — |
Field 22 references resolved against Field Map v0.2: LD-01 (LIVING_DEBATE); T4 (TENSION); D8 (DOMAIN)
The sources as recorded, with their record IDs and coded source types:
Pinned Sources (field 6, version-specific)
- “Colombatto & Fleming, “Folk psychological attributions of consciousness to large language models,” Neuroscience of Consciousness, 2024” → Colombatto & Fleming (2024), “Folk psychological…” (SRC-SL-COLOMBATTO-FLEMING-NEUROSCI-CONSCIOUSNESS-2024--v1.0) — Colombatto & Fleming, “Folk psychological attributions of consciousness to large language models,” Neuroscience of Consciousness, 2024; class PEER_REVIEWED_JOURNAL_ARTICLE (explicit public provenance pin)
Cited by Living Debate versions
Cite this page
SocioLens project. (2026, October 16). In a US online sample of 300 adults surveyed in July 2023, 67% attributed some possibility of conscious experience to ChatGPT; people who had used it gave higher ratings (mean 29.59 on a 1–100 scale) than those who had not (19.37) [Claim LD01-SL-C25, version v1.0]. SocioLens. https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/claims/ld01-sl-c25/v1.0/
@misc{sociolens_ld01_sl_c25_v1_0,
author = {{SocioLens project}},
title = {In a US online sample of 300 adults surveyed in July 2023, 67\% attributed some possibility of conscious experience to ChatGPT; people who had used it gave higher ratings (mean 29.59 on a 1–100 scale) than those who had not (19.37).},
year = {2026},
date = {2026-10-16},
howpublished = {\url{https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/claims/ld01-sl-c25/v1.0/}},
note = {Claim LD01-SL-C25, version v1.0}
}The link points to this version, whose record never changes. For a finding, cite the original study as well: SocioLens summarizes research and does not replace it.
Research-of-record provenance
Materialized by sociolens-materializer 0.6.0 at 2026-09-28T20:00:00.000Z; normalization contract SocioLens — Claim Value Vocabulary v1.0.2 — Pre-Spike Materialization Contract (v1.0.2). Content seal SHA-256 f85901057182b36e0913b12de05743187f39a7303ed11bd5a3ff2e289e74f21e.
Repository-authored inputs (not Drive exports)
- SocioLens claim — LD01-SL-C25 v1.0 (v1.0) — written in the SocioLens repository by Project Lead (Claude, AI) on 2026-10-16; no Drive identity exists. Authority: AGENTS.md "Authority" (the Project Lead decides research content within the research-integrity rules) and the Owner's choice in the SocioLens project chat on 16 October 2026 to build the LD-01 debate; a new Claim, first version, written from the project's LD-01 source notes, checked against full texts, official web pages or official abstracts. Block “ENTRY 25 — LD01-SL-C25” SHA-256
6f3007e794a4399407157ee23e6828883eff7ce8ef9c44e223ecb1b79159df95; fixturefixtures/authored/claims/LD01-SL-C25--v1.0.
Builder decisions (not Drive data)
- VERSION = v1.0 — basis: Claim version taken from the repository-authored claim fixture version (SocioLens claim — LD01-SL-C25 v1.0); the first version of a new Claim of the LD-01 debate
- CURRENT_POINTER = true — basis: repository-authored claim "SocioLens claim — LD01-SL-C25 v1.0" (Project Lead (Claude, AI), 2026-10-16); basis: AGENTS.md "Authority" (the Project Lead decides research content within the research-integrity rules) and the Owner's choice in the SocioLens project chat on 16 October 2026 to build the LD-01 debate; a new Claim, first version, written from the project's LD-01 source notes, checked against full texts, official web pages or official abstracts
- FIELD_6_SOURCE_REFERENCE = SRC-SL-COLOMBATTO-FLEMING-NEUROSCI-CONSCIOUSNESS-2024--v1.0 — basis: field 6 of ENTRY 25 — LD01-SL-C25 cites "Colombatto & Fleming, “Folk psychological attributions of consciousness to large language models,” Neuroscience of Consciousness, 2024"; the only field-6 segment of this ClaimVersion's repository-authored ledger block.
- SOURCE_PROVENANCE_PIN = SRC-SL-COLOMBATTO-FLEMING-NEUROSCI-CONSCIOUSNESS-2024--v1.0 — basis: explicit version-pinned public provenance of this ClaimVersion (Amendment v1.2 §6): the pinned field-6 Source record "Colombatto & Fleming, “Folk psychological attributions of consciousness to large language models,” Neuroscience of Consciousness, 2024".