ArticleScience advances2024
Generative AI enhances individual creativity but reduces the collective diversity of novel content.
Article in Science advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 81 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
81 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reliability of LLMs as medical assistants for the general public: a randomized preregistered study.Nature medicine · 2026Trial
- Petition style changes with AI writing support but outcomes do not improve.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
- Lower engagement of cognitive control in children on ChatGPT.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2026Article
- Introducing AI to an online petition platform changed outputs but not outcomes.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
- AI Dependence and Self-Reported Creativity Among Chinese College Students: The Roles of Motivation for AI Use and Perceived AI Literacy.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- God save the reviewer! Reviewing science in the age of AI.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Large Language Models as Tools, Models, and Partners in Creative Thinking Research: A Selective Narrative Review with the GCA Framework.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Review
- Ethical considerations of artificial intelligence in dementia research: a review of reviews.The Gerontologist · 2026Review
- AI Learning Self-Efficacy and Self-Perceived Digital Creative Functioning: A Conditional Indirect-Association Model.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Bland new world: is AI making us all think the same?Nature · 2026Article
- The rise of large language models and the direction and impact of US federal research funding.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Disclosure is not documentation: an open science framework for documenting generative AI use in scholarly research and publication workflows.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Article
- Generative AI as an External Cognitive Tool: Cognitive Dependence, AI Literacy, and Perceived Academic Creativity.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- The Impact of Generative AI Dependence on University Students' Creativity: The Mediating Role of Critical Thinking and the Moderating Role of Thinking Orientation.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Exploring College Students' AI Dependence in Human-AI Collaborative Creation: Development and Validation of the CC-PACE Model.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- How Is Generative AI Use Associated with Employee Creative Behavior? Uncovering Capability- and Risk-Based Psychological Pathways.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Beyond Cognitive Support: Social Interaction and Affective Experience in AI-Assisted Creative Thinking Among University Students.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Modelling Divergent Thinking as a Mediator Between Artificial Intelligence Cognitive Stimulation and EFL Learners' Cognitive Creativity.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Six misconceptions about large language models: A minimal model and diagnostic taxonomy.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Why sycophantic LLMs may imperil interactive norms between humans.Communications psychology · 2026Review
21 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Creativity is core to being human. Generative artificial intelligence (AI)-including powerful large language models (LLMs)-holds promise for humans to be more creative by offering new ideas, or less creative by anchoring on generative AI ideas. We study the causal impact of generative AI ideas on the production of short stories in an online experiment where some writers obtained story ideas from an LLM. We find that access to generative AI ideas causes stories to be evaluated as more creative, better written, and more enjoyable, especially among less creative writers. However, generative AI-enabled stories are more similar to each other than stories by humans alone. These results point to an increase in individual creativity at the risk of losing collective novelty. This dynamic resembles a social dilemma: With generative AI, writers are individually better off, but collectively a narrower scope of novel content is produced. Our results have implications for researchers, policy-makers, and practitioners interested in bolstering creativity.
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.