Readers prefer ChatGPT stories over human authors until the AI label is revealed
a study of 2,500 participants found readers rated chatgpt short stories higher for quality than human-written ones, but ratings plummeted when the ai origin was disclosed, highlighting a stark bias against machine creativity.
a study published in the journal judgment and decision making analyzed the reactions of 2,587 participants who read six short stories, half written by humans and half generated by chatgpt-4. when the source was blinded, ai stories received significantly higher mean scores for quality (1.54 vs 0.97) and immersion (1.42 vs 1.00) than human texts, likely because ai writing is smoother and easier to process. however, the experiments revealed a robust 'ai labeling effect': when participants were told a story was ai-generated, their ratings dropped, and when told it was human-written, ratings rose, regardless of the actual origin. furthermore, ai skeptics rated stories lower when told they were ai-generated, while ai enthusiasts rated them higher, yet no group could reliably identify the stories' origins better than chance when tested directly.