» Articles » PMID: 37923764

Bias Against AI Art Can Enhance Perceptions of Human Creativity

Overview
Journal Sci Rep
Specialty Science
Date 2023 Nov 4
PMID 37923764
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The contemporary art world is conservatively estimated to be a $65 billion USD market that employs millions of human artists, sellers, and collectors globally. Recent attention paid to AI-made art in prestigious galleries, museums, and popular media has provoked debate around how these statistics will change. Unanswered questions fuel growing anxieties. Are AI-made and human-made art evaluated in the same ways? How will growing exposure to AI-made art impact evaluations of human creativity? Our research uses a psychological lens to explore these questions in the realm of visual art. We find that people devalue art labeled as AI-made across a variety of dimensions, even when they report it is indistinguishable from human-made art, and even when they believe it was produced collaboratively with a human. We also find that comparing images labeled as human-made to images labeled as AI-made increases perceptions of human creativity, an effect that can be leveraged to increase the value of human effort. Results are robust across six experiments (N = 2965) using a range of human-made and AI-made stimuli and incorporating representative samples of the US population. Finally, we highlight conditions that strengthen effects as well as dimensions where AI-devaluation effects are more pronounced.

Citing Articles

Me vs. the machine? Subjective evaluations of human- and AI-generated advice.

Osborne M, Bailey E Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):3980.

PMID: 39893236 PMC: 11787321. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-86623-6.


Human perception of art in the age of artificial intelligence.

van Hees J, Grootswagers T, Quek G, Varlet M Front Psychol. 2025; 15():1497469.

PMID: 39845559 PMC: 11750838. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1497469.

References
1.
Epstein Z, Hertzmann A, Akten M, Farid H, Fjeld J, Frank M . Art and the science of generative AI. Science. 2023; 380(6650):1110-1111. DOI: 10.1126/science.adh4451. View

2.
Spee B, Pelowski M, Arato J, Mikuni J, Tran U, Eisenegger C . Social reputation influences on liking and willingness-to-pay for artworks: A multimethod design investigating choice behavior along with physiological measures and motivational factors. PLoS One. 2022; 17(4):e0266020. PMC: 9020698. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0266020. View

3.
Marin M, Leder H . Examining complexity across domains: relating subjective and objective measures of affective environmental scenes, paintings and music. PLoS One. 2013; 8(8):e72412. PMC: 3745471. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072412. View

4.
Schepman A, Rodway P . Initial validation of the general attitudes towards Artificial Intelligence Scale. Comput Hum Behav Rep. 2021; 1:100014. PMC: 7231759. DOI: 10.1016/j.chbr.2020.100014. View

5.
Epstein Z, Levine S, Rand D, Rahwan I . Who Gets Credit for AI-Generated Art?. iScience. 2020; 23(9):101515. PMC: 7492988. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2020.101515. View