ArticlePsychology research and behavior management2023
A Cogitation on the ChatGPT Craze from the Perspective of Psychological Algorithm Aversion and Appreciation.
Article in Psychology research and behavior management, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- "ChatGPT says no": agency, trust, and blame in Twitter discourses after the launch of ChatGPT.AI and ethics · 2025Article
- Integrating large language models in mental health practice: a qualitative descriptive study based on expert interviews.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2024-05-10Euphemisms for Plagiarism · Plagiarism of/in Article ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent times, ChatGPT has garnered significant interest from the public, sparking a range of reactions that encompass both aversion and appreciation. This paper delves into the paradoxical attitudes of individuals towards ChatGPT, highlighting the simultaneous existence of algorithmic aversion and appreciation. A comprehensive analysis is conducted from the vantage points of psychology and algorithmic decision-making, exploring the underlying causes of these conflicting attitudes from three dimensions: self-performance, task types, and individual factors. Subsequently, strategies to reconcile these opposing psychological stances are proposed, delineated into two categories: flexible coping and inflexible coping. In light of the ongoing advancements in artificial intelligence, this paper posits recommendations for the attitudes and actions that individuals ought to adopt in the face of artificial intelligence. Regardless of whether one exhibits algorithm aversion or appreciation, the paper underscores that coexisting with algorithms is an inescapable reality in the age of artificial intelligence, necessitating the preservation of human advantages.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.