ArticleScientific reports2024
Establishing the importance of co-creation and self-efficacy in creative collaboration with artificial intelligence.
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 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring College Students' AI Dependence in Human-AI Collaborative Creation: Development and Validation of the CC-PACE Model.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- From pixels to precision: a narrative review of AI-driven 3D morphological analysis and digital twinning in alveolar cleft management.Translational pediatrics · 2026Review
- Beyond Cognitive Support: Social Interaction and Affective Experience in AI-Assisted Creative Thinking Among University Students.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- The Influence of AI on Critical Thinking and Creativity in L2 Learning Contexts: A Social Cognitive Perspective.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Exploring the impact of AI tools on filmmakers' creative satisfaction: the mediating role of creative efficiency and autonomy.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Creativity beyond the isolated mind: toward a biopsychosocial and sociotechnical perspective.Frontiers in cognition · 2026Article
- How generative AI shapes designers' cultural heritage revitalization intention: process and content cues in AI-assisted cultural heritage design.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Human-AI co-creation in generative AI video: content characteristics, flow experience, and continued creation intention-a hybrid SEM-ANN study.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Article
- Subjective task load and psychological ownership in generative AI collaborative music creation: mechanisms shaping creators' state sense of agency.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- A psychological dynamics model of AI-supported learning: examining the mediating and moderating effects on preservice early childhood teachers' instructional design ability.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- The chain mediating role of critical thinking and AI self-efficacy in GenAI usage competence and engineering students' creativity.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Cyber-Creativity: A Decalogue of Research Challenges.Journal of Intelligence · 2025Article
- Impact of generative AI interaction and output quality on university students' learning outcomes: a technology-mediated and motivation-driven approach.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Development of Evidence-Based Guidelines for the Integration of Generative AI in University Education Through a Multidisciplinary, Consensus-Based Approach.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2025Article
- How mindfulness shapes AI competence: a structural equation modeling analysis of mindfulness, AI literacy and behavioral intention in Chinese media students.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- From humans to AI: understanding why AI is perceived as the preferred co-creation partner.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- The influence of generative artificial intelligence on creative cognition of design students: a chain mediation model of self-efficacy and anxiety.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The emergence of generative AI technologies has led to an increasing number of people collaborating with AI to produce creative works. Across two experimental studies, in which we carefully designed and programmed state-of-the-art human-AI interfaces, we examine how the design of generative AI systems influences human creativity (poetry writing). First, we find that people were most creative when writing a poem on their own, compared to first receiving a poem generated by an AI system and using sophisticated tools to edit it (Study 1). Following this, we demonstrate that this creativity deficit dissipates when people co-create with-not edit-AI and establish creative self-efficacy as an important mechanism in this process (Study 2). Thus, our findings indicate that people must occupy the role of a co-creator, not an editor, to reap the benefits of generative AI in the production of creative works.
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.