pith. sign in

arxiv: 2502.18357 · v1 · pith:S5TDSLWYnew · submitted 2025-02-25 · 💻 cs.HC · cs.AI· cs.CY

Which Contributions Deserve Credit? Perceptions of Attribution in Human-AI Co-Creation

classification 💻 cs.HC cs.AIcs.CY
keywords contributionsattributioncreditpartnerassigneddifferenthumanacross
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

AI systems powered by large language models can act as capable assistants for writing and editing. In these tasks, the AI system acts as a co-creative partner, making novel contributions to an artifact-under-creation alongside its human partner(s). One question that arises in these scenarios is the extent to which AI should be credited for its contributions. We examined knowledge workers' views of attribution through a survey study (N=155) and found that they assigned different levels of credit across different contribution types, amounts, and initiative. Compared to a human partner, we observed a consistent pattern in which AI was assigned less credit for equivalent contributions. Participants felt that disclosing AI involvement was important and used a variety of criteria to make attribution judgments, including the quality of contributions, personal values, and technology considerations. Our results motivate and inform new approaches for crediting AI contributions to co-created work.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Vibe Coding in Product Teams: Reconfiguring AI-Assisted Workflows, Prototyping, and Collaboration

    cs.HC 2025-09 accept novelty 5.0

    Interviews reveal a four-stage vibe coding workflow that accelerates prototyping while introducing tensions between quick efficiency and reflective design intention, plus asymmetries in trust and ownership.