If you heard a comedian deliver this joke to a club, you may smile, or sigh, or even throw a heckle. But what if you discovered that the artist got the material from artificial intelligence and not his own brain? Would you make you feel more confident about your own ability to make stand-up comedy?
This is the line of dispute that is put in new research from Jake TonyKellogg Assistant Professor of Marketing. He and the partner Reich In Nyu he was interested in a result that Reich had noticed how people respond to the content created by AI.
Thus, Teeny and Reich ran a series of experiments in which they evaluated people’s confidence in their creative ability after exposing creative works described either as AI or created by a human being. The researchers have consistently found that people were more confident about their ability to complete a creative work after seeing exactly the same work being credited to AI for a human being.
To a large extent, this answer came from a preliminary idea that AI is less creatively capable of humans. “If you get exactly the same piece of high quality or low quality work. You will see this result-that people believe that AI is generally worse in producing creative content.
The results could be important not only for art but for innovation. As many supporters envision a future where AI reinforces-does not replace-human abilities, it is important to understand how exposure to work produced by AI affects the way people see their own work and abilities.
“From a practical point of view, confidence is such an important driving force for innovation,” Teeny adds, “and previous research shows that much of our behavior is led by the mere perception that we are able to do this behavior, whether it is to take on a part of creative work or to apply for a job.”
A creative thrust of trust
The researchers have conducted multiple studies to understand how the work supposed to be created by AI affects people’s confidence.
In an experiment, hundreds of people are reading a joke about an antidepressant pill that feels down (Why did the Lexapro pill felt down? Because that I had a depressed job!). Some learned that the genetic AI had written the joke, while others said that a man had written it. The participants then evaluated the sense of the author’s humor and their own ability to find a better joke.
People said the writer had a worse sense of humor – from about 16 percent – when they thought it was written by AI against a man. In addition, people in AI group were about 15 percent more confident than the people of the human team to be able to create a better joke.
In a parallel study, hundreds of people examined a work of art art and learned that it had been created either by AI or by one human. Those who believed that the work of art was subsequently created more confidence in their own ability to design-and considered the illustrator less specialized-than they thought was created by a human artist.
Other studies have shown that these same results came about a cartoon cartoon, a short story, and even a very praised poem. In addition, people were not only more confident about their ability to do these creative activities as they think that AI (unlike a person) created it, but this increased trust made people more willing to participate in their own creative activities.
A semi-human comparison
So what’s behind this result?
Teeny highlights the established psychological theory of social comparison.
“Much of our self-reversals are based on how we compare ourselves to others,” he says. “If we are exposed to people we believe are really good at something, maybe we think, ‘Oh, I’m not so good at that [task] As I thought I was. “But if we are exposed to people who do something bad or who believe they are less specialized. We believe, ‘I’m really good at it.’
But to make social comparison, there must be some perceived resemblance between the person who makes the crisis and the goal of comparison. “If I see my two -year -old daughter struggling to finish a puzzle. It is not going to make me believe that I am extremely good at puzzle,” Teeny says.
Although genetic AI is not human, people tend to see it as such when they compare its abilities with their own. “Genetics AI acts and thinks and even speaks like another person, so we consider it as a kind of semi-human and compare our abilities with it as if he were another person,” says Teeny.
Consequently, because many people have a preliminary notion that AI is not particularly good in creative work, exposure to AI content can enhance their confidence.
Encouraging trust and creativity
The findings have practical consequences on a wide range of arrangements.
In marketing, for example, “if you are trying to make people find a new marketing idea, you could show them what genetic AI produced and say,” See if you can’t find anything better, “says Teeny.” This will motivate them more than showing them something else. Gets the ball of trust. ”
Similarly, in education, which shows that students work that AI has created could enhance their confidence by completing the work, whether it writes a paper, produces works of art, or comes with new uses for products.
However, increased trust does not necessarily mean increased ability or better production.
For one of the studies, the researchers showed people a cartoon caption and told some of them that it was created by AI and others that it was written by a human being. Those in Group AI were more confident of their ability to write funny captions and more likely to evaluate their captions as funny than participants who said that a man had written the original caption. However, when independent graduates re -examined the captions that all the participants wrote, the judges said the captions written by the two teams were just as funny.
“The presentation of the people created by AI can help them try things out or make an effort. It takes the train to leave the station,” Teeny says. “But may not help accelerate or reach a different destination.”
