In an era where artificial intelligence is evolving at an explosive pace, it is not just the capabilities of the technology but also our collective psychological reactions that shape the direction of society. A key concept is FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out). Although typically associated with social media, FOMO has increasingly become a cultural and strategic driving force in the AI landscape.
The question is whether it has some overlooked consequences with long-term effects. For within FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out) often lies a lack of awareness and not least a lack of planning, which can make it easier to create learning and effect, and not least measurement points, which one can redefine into insights and realizations.
Let’s briefly examine how FOMO can be a driving force at multiple levels. However, for the sake of good order, I will exclude youth from the following discussion. Their driving force is a different and significant factor, and this difference alone can have a major impact on our future understanding of them. I will describe that later
We Will Explore FOMO as a Driving Force and its Three Levels
Individuals, organizations, and nations no longer act solely based on needs but increasingly on the fear of being left behind. This fear manifests in:
• Private citizens pursuing AI skills out of fear of becoming irrelevant in the job market. In some employee groups, this can lead to a form of digital inadequacy. At the same time, they may quickly become absorbed by the ease of language models like ChatGPT, which is the most widely used in Denmark. A common language at the individual level often does not exist in professional or relational communities.
• Companies investing in AI solutions without a clear strategy, driven by a sense that everyone else is doing it. Without a deeper understanding of the technology and its consequences, can this create risks of over-implementation, lack of return, and undefined metrics?
• States and regions accelerating investments and legislation in a global race to secure technological sovereignty. The focus on being frontrunners or winning the future technological race overshadows reflecting on what kind of future we want.
However, many experience that the constant demand to relate to, understand, and use new AI technologies creates fatigue. This can manifest as decision fatigue, resignation, and a growing sense of indifference. Where FOMO pushes for pace and ambition, fatigue pulls in the opposite direction: towards withdrawal, oversaturation, and passivity.
The same applies to the youth, even though their approach to AI is shaped by a mindset established early in their upbringing: technology is a premise rather than a tool. Let’s briefly examine their perspective.
The Youth Use AI Differently, but Their Reactions Are Important Indicators
In the past three years, the youth’s use of AI language models like ChatGPT and Copilot, which have gained a foothold in many of the country’s educational institutions, has been a debated topic. This topic is a story in itself and is therefore only briefly mentioned here. However, the important aspect of the experiences that young people bring is that they have not adopted language models like ChatGPT solely because of FOMO but often also because they grew up asking Google and Siri about everything. The next natural step for them is ChatGPT, at a time when most youth education programs are left to define their own guidelines (the same applies to primary schools, by the way). Several higher education institutions talk about young people needing to use language models, but how this affects the possibility of a long-term plan is still unclear.
FOMO is also part of this, for if classmates use ChatGPT to solve a homework assignment, others will also feel compelled to do so. This can be out of fear of not delivering to the same standard or due to time pressure compared to others. The unclear lines and lack of a common language leave the responsibility with the youth, who in some cases experience fatigue -burnout that involves having to sort, understand, and oversee the distinction between their own knowledge, their own words, and input from ChatGPT.
Is AI-Fatigue a Consequence in a Broader Context?
In my work with children and youth, I have seen how the lack of a clear policy for digital literacy has left schools, teachers, and families without the tools to navigate a digitized everyday life. The same pattern is now repeating itself with AI in education. The intention is present, but without a plan for what students should learn and what teachers should be able to do, insecurity and uncertainty arise.
A study from DPU shows that the understanding of technology has declined significantly since 2018, at a time when we would otherwise expect the opposite. How do we ensure that both professionals and students do not develop a sense of powerlessness and indifference as a consequence of the intuitive burden?
The same can apply to other sectors and life roles. In an orthopedic surgery department where I worked with communication and collaboration, I encountered the staff’s frustration and fear that an AI robot would take their place between them and the patient. Their professional identity was compromised. Everyone was left to adapt on their own, but no one really had a plan, and it could have ended with resignations, mistakes, and fatigue. How do we ensure that professional groups do not lose touch with their primary professionalism, such as care, patient safety, or a sense of the unspoken?
I have also met municipalities that profile themselves as leaders in AI. But if you ask the employees, the technology is often not implemented yet. Or it is met with uncertainty and extra work. For example, in a municipal citizen service that aims to streamline and serve citizens via a telephone robot, confusion and increased pressure are created instead because citizens do not understand what the telephone robot is saying. Or worse, the telephone robot does not respond to their commands. ”Make it quick and easy to understand,” says the digital voice, but who can do that if the question is about an elderly person who has lost their wallet containing their passport, driver’s license, and health insurance card? The intentions are good, but if they are not thought through, the solutions easily become symbolic and created for the sake of technology, not people. Furthermore, it can lead to a sense of resignation among citizens.
The Journey from FOMO to Fatigue is Short but Leaves Us in No Man’s Land
FOMO in the context of AI is not just a side effect; it is an indicator of our technological present and should be an indicator of where there is a need for more slowness, ethics, and consideration. The question is whether, by acknowledging FOMO as a psychological and structural mechanism, we can integrate it into strategic thinking and instead ask what it is we are afraid of missing out on. As long as we ask the questions, we remain human and awake. But when we lose the desire to ask them, there is a risk that we will also see a decline in motivation and a fall in the important ingredient: namely, the ethical considerations and decisions that are human-made and hopeful – witch is the opposite of fatigue.
