Artificial intelligence: ChatGPT writes the more captivating short stories for many
The approximately 1,700 participants in the first of a total of three experiments did not know with certainty who the story they
- Center-left2
- Center-right1
1 agency rewrite / co-publication detected
Summary
The approximately 1,700 participants in the first of a total of three experiments did not know for sure who the story they were reading came from. Fewer than one in two of a total of around 900 other participants were able to correctly assign which of them had been generated and which had been written by a human after reading two short stories. An indication could therefore be a certain lack of variety, according to a contribution of the trade union Education and Science (GEW).
Furthermore, However, there are also many instructions on the net to avoid such simple recognition features – and to make the language more human again. Weisberg suspects that the mechanism behind it is a kind of circular closure. AI texts tend to be clearer, more direct and easier to process. In the two subsequent experiments that Weisberg conducted with her colleague Sydney Sears, this finding was also confirmed.
In addition, Those who claimed to have been using ChatGPT and similar tools for a while also tended to be a little better at assigning the authors of the texts correctly. The reason for this is that people actually want to prefer the stories of human authors, says Deena Weisberg, who is a psychologist at the Catholic Villanova University in the USA. We assume that creative writing requires unique human skills, such as life experience or emotional understanding.
Cross-referenced from 3 sources.
Factual coreconfirmed by several independent voices
The approximately 1,700 participants in the first of a total of three experiments did not know for sure who the story they were reading came from.
reliability low1/2 sourcesFewer than one in two of a total of around 900 other participants were able to correctly assign which of them had been generated and which had been written by a human after reading two short stories.
reliability low1/2 sourcesAn indication could therefore be a certain lack of variety, according to a contribution of the trade union Education and Science (GEW).
reliability low1/2 sourcesHowever, there are also many instructions on the net to avoid such simple recognition features – and to make the language more human again.
reliability low1/2 sourcesWeisberg suspects that the mechanism behind it is a kind of circular closure. AI texts tend to be clearer, more direct and easier to process.
reliability low1/2 sourcesIn the two subsequent experiments that Weisberg conducted with her colleague Sydney Sears, this finding was also confirmed.
reliability low1/2 sourcesThose who claimed to have been using ChatGPT and similar tools for a while also tended to be a little better at assigning the authors of the texts correctly.
reliability low1/2 sourcesThe reason for this is that people actually want to prefer the stories of human authors, says Deena Weisberg, who is a psychologist at the Catholic Villanova University in the USA. We assume that creative writing requires unique human skills, such as life experience or emotional understanding.
reliability low1/2 sources
Disputedincompatible versions — to verify
No factual contradiction detected between sources.
Framing by sidesame fact, different words — loaded terms highlighted
No notable framing divergence.
Blind spotwhat one side keeps silent
No blind spot detected: every side covers the same facts.
Sources3 sources cross-checked
Center-left2
Center-right1