ArticleScientific reports2024
Understanding how personality traits, experiences, and attitudes shape negative bias toward AI-generated artworks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artistic-Value Descriptions Are Associated with Higher Aesthetic Ratings than Social-Value Descriptions for AI-Generated Variants of Classical Paintings.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Psychotherapists' Trust, Distrust, and Generative AI Practices in Psychotherapy: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Where does the bias begin? Cognitive processing differences in the aesthetic evaluation of AI-generated art.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Beyond ethics and aesthetics: perceived lay theory violations and agency disruption in AI-generated art.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Article
- Anti-AI Bias Toward Couple Images and Couple Counseling: Findings from Two Experiments.Archives of sexual behavior · 2025Article
- The Effects of (Dis)similarities Between the Creator and the Assessor on Assessing Creativity: A Comparison of Humans and LLMs.Journal of Intelligence · 2025Article
- Art-induced psychological well-being: Individual traits shape the beneficial effects of aesthetic experiences.PloS one · 2025Article
- Creativity and aesthetic evaluation of AI-generated artworks: bridging problems and methods from psychology to AI.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study primarily aimed to understand whether individual factors could predict how people perceive and evaluate artworks that are perceived to be produced by AI. Additionally, the study attempted to investigate and confirm the existence of a negative bias toward AI-generated artworks and to reveal possible individual factors predicting such negative bias. A total of 201 participants completed a survey, rating images on liking, perceived positive emotion, and believed human or AI origin. The findings of the study showed that some individual characteristics as creative personal identity and openness to experience personality influence how people perceive the presented artworks in function of their believed source. Participants were unable to consistently distinguish between human and AI-created images. Furthermore, despite generally preferring the AI-generated artworks over human-made ones, the participants displayed a negative bias against AI-generated artworks when subjective perception of source attribution was considered, thus rating as less preferable the artworks perceived more as AI-generated, independently on their true source. Our findings hold potential value for comprehending the acceptability of products generated by AI technology.
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.