The exception is “original”; poems are rated as less original when participants are told the poem is generated by AI vs. being told the poem is written by a human (two-sided Welch’s t(4654.412) = -16.333, p < 0.0001, pBonf < 0.0001, Meandifference = -0.699, Cohen’s d = -0.478, 99.5% CI –0.819 to –0.579), but originality ratings for actually AI-generated poems are not significantly higher than for actually human-written poems (two-sided Welch’s t(6957.818) = 1.654, p = 0.098, pBonf = 1.000, Meandifference = 0.059, Cohen’s d = 0.040, 99.5% CI –0.041 to 0.160). The largest effect is on “rhythm”: AI-generated poems are rated as having much better rhythm than the poems written by famous poets (two-sided Welch’s t(6694.647) = 35.319, p < 0.0001, pBonf < 0.0001, Meandifference = 1.168, Cohen’s d = 0.847, 99.5% CI 1.075 to 1.260). This is remarkably consistent; as seen in Fig. 2, all 5 AI-generated poems are rated more highly in overall quality than all 5 human-authored poems.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: