ArticleJournal of Intelligence2024
GenAI Creativity in Narrative Tasks: Exploring New Forms of Creativity.
Article in Journal of Intelligence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Stable Diffusion Models Reveal a Persisting Human-AI Gap in Visual Creativity.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- The Role of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Shaping University Students' Learning Behavior: A Mixed-Method Research Based on the COM-B Model.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Human vs. LLM Creativity: A Comparative Analysis of Task-Dependent Asymmetry and Linguistic Mechanisms.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Generative artificial intelligence models outperform students on divergent and convergent thinking assessments.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Cyber-Creativity: A Decalogue of Research Challenges.Journal of Intelligence · 2025Article
- Generative AI in Game Design: Enhancing Creativity or Constraining Innovation?Journal of Intelligence · 2025Article
- When ChatGPT Writes Your Research Proposal: Scientific Creativity in the Age of Generative AI.Journal of Intelligence · 2025Article
- Can ChatGPT Boost Students' Employment Confidence? A Pioneering Booster for Career Readiness.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Assessing the Effect of Artificial Intelligence Anxiety on Turnover Intention: The Mediating Role of Quiet Quitting in Turkish Small and Medium Enterprises.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study examined generative artificial intelligences (GenAIs), as popularized by ChatGPT, in standardized creativity tests. Benchmarking GenAI against human performance, the results showed that ChatGPT demonstrated remarkable fluency in content generation, though the creative output was average. The random nature of AI creativity and the dependency on the richness of the training database require a reassessment of traditional creativity metrics, especially for AI. Our findings highlight the integral role humans play in guiding AI to foster genuine originality, suggesting the need for future research in human-AI co-creation and the development of robust AI creativity measurement mechanisms.
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.