GPT produces click distributions significantly different from real humans in 53% of UX first-click tasks, with prompting techniques like personas and chain-of-thought failing to improve alignment.
We reject the use of generative artificial intelligence for reflexive qualitative research.Qualitative Inquiry, 0(0): 10778004251401851, 2025
2 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
2
Pith papers citing it
years
2026 2verdicts
UNVERDICTED 2representative citing papers
Generative AI suitability in qualitative research depends primarily on the approach (small-q positivist/post-positivist or Big Q non-positivist) along with skills, ethics, and personal preferences.
citing papers explorer
-
What Would GPT Click: Practical Effects of Human-AI Behavioral Misalignment and the Cost of Synthetic Participants in User Experience
GPT produces click distributions significantly different from real humans in 53% of UX first-click tasks, with prompting techniques like personas and chain-of-thought failing to improve alignment.
-
To Vibe Research or Not to Vibe Research? Generative AI in Qualitative Research
Generative AI suitability in qualitative research depends primarily on the approach (small-q positivist/post-positivist or Big Q non-positivist) along with skills, ethics, and personal preferences.