Experimenting with Generative AI: Does ChatGPT Really Increase Everyone's Productivity?

Voraprapa Nakavachara, Tanapong Potipiti, Thanee Chaiwat
{"title":"Experimenting with Generative AI: Does ChatGPT Really Increase Everyone's Productivity?","authors":"Voraprapa Nakavachara, Tanapong Potipiti, Thanee Chaiwat","doi":"arxiv-2403.01770","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Generative AI technologies such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and MidJourney have made\nremarkable progress in recent years. Recent literature has documented ChatGPT's\npositive impact on productivity in areas where it has strong expertise,\nattributable to extensive training datasets, such as the English language and\nPython/SQL programming. However, there is still limited literature regarding\nChatGPT's performance in areas where its capabilities could still be further\nenhanced. This paper aims to fill this gap. We conducted an experiment in which\neconomics students were asked to perform writing analysis tasks in a\nnon-English language (specifically, Thai) and math & data analysis tasks using\na less frequently used programming package (specifically, Stata). The findings\nsuggest that, on average, participants performed better using ChatGPT in terms\nof scores and time taken to complete the tasks. However, a detailed examination\nreveals that 34% of participants saw no improvement in writing analysis tasks,\nand 42% did not improve in math & data analysis tasks when employing ChatGPT.\nFurther investigation indicated that higher-ability students, as proxied by\ntheir econometrics grades, were the ones who performed worse in writing\nanalysis tasks when using ChatGPT. We also found evidence that students with\nbetter digital skills performed better with ChatGPT. This research provides\ninsights on the impact of generative AI. Thus, stakeholders can make informed\ndecisions to implement appropriate policy frameworks or redesign educational\nsystems. It also highlights the critical role of human skills in addressing and\ncomplementing the limitations of technology.","PeriodicalId":501487,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - QuantFin - Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - QuantFin - Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2403.01770","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Generative AI technologies such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and MidJourney have made remarkable progress in recent years. Recent literature has documented ChatGPT's positive impact on productivity in areas where it has strong expertise, attributable to extensive training datasets, such as the English language and Python/SQL programming. However, there is still limited literature regarding ChatGPT's performance in areas where its capabilities could still be further enhanced. This paper aims to fill this gap. We conducted an experiment in which economics students were asked to perform writing analysis tasks in a non-English language (specifically, Thai) and math & data analysis tasks using a less frequently used programming package (specifically, Stata). The findings suggest that, on average, participants performed better using ChatGPT in terms of scores and time taken to complete the tasks. However, a detailed examination reveals that 34% of participants saw no improvement in writing analysis tasks, and 42% did not improve in math & data analysis tasks when employing ChatGPT. Further investigation indicated that higher-ability students, as proxied by their econometrics grades, were the ones who performed worse in writing analysis tasks when using ChatGPT. We also found evidence that students with better digital skills performed better with ChatGPT. This research provides insights on the impact of generative AI. Thus, stakeholders can make informed decisions to implement appropriate policy frameworks or redesign educational systems. It also highlights the critical role of human skills in addressing and complementing the limitations of technology.
实验生成式人工智能:ChatGPT 真的能提高每个人的工作效率吗?
近年来,ChatGPT、Gemini 和 MidJourney 等生成式人工智能技术取得了显著进步。最近的文献记录了 ChatGPT 在一些领域对生产力的积极影响,在这些领域,ChatGPT 拥有强大的专业知识,这归功于大量的训练数据集,例如英语和 Python/SQL 编程。然而,关于 ChatGPT 在其能力仍有待进一步提高的领域中的表现的文献仍然有限。本文旨在填补这一空白。我们进行了一项实验,要求经济学学生使用非英语语言(特别是泰语)完成写作分析任务,并使用不太常用的编程软件包(特别是 Stata)完成数学和数据分析任务。研究结果表明,就得分和完成任务所需的时间而言,使用 ChatGPT 的学员平均成绩更好。进一步的调查表明,使用 ChatGPT 时,以计量经济学成绩为标准的高能力学生在写作分析任务中表现较差。我们还发现,数字技能较好的学生在使用 ChatGPT 时表现更好。这项研究为生成式人工智能的影响提供了启示。因此,利益相关者可以做出明智的决定,实施适当的政策框架或重新设计教育系统。它还强调了人类技能在解决和补充技术局限性方面的关键作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信