Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

How AI Ideas Affect the Creativity, Diversity, and Evolution of Human Ideas: Evidence From a Large, Dynamic Experiment

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2401.13481 v3 pith:XAUGLNHH submitted 2024-01-24 cs.CY cs.AIcs.CLcs.HC

classification cs.CYcs.AIcs.CLcs.HC
keywords ideasparticipantsexposurewereaffectcreativecreativitydiversity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Exposure to large language model output is rapidly increasing. How will seeing AI-generated ideas affect human ideas? We conducted an experiment (800+ participants, 40+ countries) where participants viewed creative ideas that were from ChatGPT or prior experimental participants and then brainstormed their own idea. We varied the number of AI-generated examples (none, low, or high exposure) and if the examples were labeled as 'AI' (disclosure). Our dynamic experiment design -- ideas from prior participants in an experimental condition are used as stimuli for future participants in the same experimental condition -- speaks to the interdependent process of cultural creation: creative ideas are built upon prior ideas. Hence, we capture the compounding effects of having LLMs 'in the culture loop'. We find that high AI exposure (but not low AI exposure) did not affect the creativity of individual ideas but did increase the average amount and rate of change of collective idea diversity. AI made ideas different, not better. There were no main effects of disclosure. We also found that self-reported creative people were less influenced by knowing an idea was from AI and that participants may knowingly adopt AI ideas when the task is difficult. Our findings suggest that introducing AI ideas may increase collective diversity but not individual creativity.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. AI4Research: A Survey of Artificial Intelligence for Scientific Research

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey that organizes AI-for-research work into five tasks, comprehension, survey, discovery, writing, and peer review, and compiles associated tools and benchmarks.

  2. AI, Humans, and Data Science: Optimizing Roles Across Workflows and the Workforce

    cs.CY 2025-07 unverdicted novelty 3.0 of 10

    A conference position paper argues that AI, especially agentic AI, works best as a complement to human data scientists, who should lead planning and activation while AI leads execution.

Pith tools