大型语言模型(LLMs)对创造性多样性的均质化效应:人类和ChatGPT写作的实证比较

Kibum Moon, Adam E. Green, Kostadin Kushlev
{"title":"大型语言模型(LLMs)对创造性多样性的均质化效应:人类和ChatGPT写作的实证比较","authors":"Kibum Moon,&nbsp;Adam E. Green,&nbsp;Kostadin Kushlev","doi":"10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Generative AI systems, especially Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, have recently emerged as significant contributors to creative processes. While LLMs can produce creative content that might be as good as or even better than human-created content, their widespread use risks reducing creative diversity across groups of people. In the present research, we aimed to quantify this homogenizing effect of LLMs on creative diversity, not only at the individual level but also at the collective level. Across three preregistered studies, we analyzed 2,200 college admissions essays. Using a novel measure—the diversity growth rate—we showed that each additional human-written essay contributed more new ideas than did each additional GPT-4 essay. Notably, this difference became more pronounced as more essays were included in the analysis and persisted despite efforts to enhance AI-generated content through both prompt and parameter modifications. Overall, our findings suggest that, despite their potential to enhance individual creativity, the widespread use of LLMs could diminish the collective diversity of creative ideas.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100324,"journal":{"name":"Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100207"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Homogenizing effect of large language models (LLMs) on creative diversity: An empirical comparison of human and ChatGPT writing\",\"authors\":\"Kibum Moon,&nbsp;Adam E. Green,&nbsp;Kostadin Kushlev\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100207\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Generative AI systems, especially Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, have recently emerged as significant contributors to creative processes. While LLMs can produce creative content that might be as good as or even better than human-created content, their widespread use risks reducing creative diversity across groups of people. In the present research, we aimed to quantify this homogenizing effect of LLMs on creative diversity, not only at the individual level but also at the collective level. Across three preregistered studies, we analyzed 2,200 college admissions essays. Using a novel measure—the diversity growth rate—we showed that each additional human-written essay contributed more new ideas than did each additional GPT-4 essay. Notably, this difference became more pronounced as more essays were included in the analysis and persisted despite efforts to enhance AI-generated content through both prompt and parameter modifications. Overall, our findings suggest that, despite their potential to enhance individual creativity, the widespread use of LLMs could diminish the collective diversity of creative ideas.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100324,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans\",\"volume\":\"6 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100207\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S294988212500091X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S294988212500091X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生成式人工智能系统,尤其是像ChatGPT这样的大型语言模型(llm),最近已经成为创造性过程的重要贡献者。虽然法学硕士可以产生与人类创造的内容一样好的创造性内容,甚至比人类创造的内容更好,但它们的广泛使用可能会减少群体之间创造性的多样性。在目前的研究中,我们旨在量化法学硕士对创造性多样性的同质化效应,不仅在个人层面,而且在集体层面。在三项预先注册的研究中,我们分析了2200份大学入学申请文书。使用一种新颖的测量方法——多样性增长率——我们发现,每一篇额外的人工写作论文比每一篇额外的GPT-4论文贡献了更多的新想法。值得注意的是,随着更多的文章被纳入分析,这种差异变得更加明显,尽管通过提示和参数修改来增强人工智能生成的内容,这种差异仍然存在。总的来说,我们的研究结果表明,尽管法学硕士有增强个人创造力的潜力,但法学硕士的广泛使用可能会减少创造性思想的集体多样性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Homogenizing effect of large language models (LLMs) on creative diversity: An empirical comparison of human and ChatGPT writing
Generative AI systems, especially Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, have recently emerged as significant contributors to creative processes. While LLMs can produce creative content that might be as good as or even better than human-created content, their widespread use risks reducing creative diversity across groups of people. In the present research, we aimed to quantify this homogenizing effect of LLMs on creative diversity, not only at the individual level but also at the collective level. Across three preregistered studies, we analyzed 2,200 college admissions essays. Using a novel measure—the diversity growth rate—we showed that each additional human-written essay contributed more new ideas than did each additional GPT-4 essay. Notably, this difference became more pronounced as more essays were included in the analysis and persisted despite efforts to enhance AI-generated content through both prompt and parameter modifications. Overall, our findings suggest that, despite their potential to enhance individual creativity, the widespread use of LLMs could diminish the collective diversity of creative ideas.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信