REVIEW 1 cited by
The AI Ghostwriter Effect: When Users Do Not Perceive Ownership of AI-Generated Text But Self-Declare as Authors
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Human-AI interaction in text production increases complexity in authorship. In two empirical studies (n1 = 30 & n2 = 96), we investigate authorship and ownership in human-AI collaboration for personalized language generation. We show an AI Ghostwriter Effect: Users do not consider themselves the owners and authors of AI-generated text but refrain from publicly declaring AI authorship. Personalization of AI-generated texts did not impact the AI Ghostwriter Effect, and higher levels of participants' influence on texts increased their sense of ownership. Participants were more likely to attribute ownership to supposedly human ghostwriters than AI ghostwriters, resulting in a higher ownership-authorship discrepancy for human ghostwriters. Rationalizations for authorship in AI ghostwriters and human ghostwriters were similar. We discuss how our findings relate to psychological ownership and human-AI interaction to lay the foundations for adapting authorship frameworks and user interfaces in AI in text-generation tasks.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Timing Matters: How Using LLMs at Different Timings Influences Writers' Perceptions and Ideation Outcomes in AI-Assisted Ideation
Using an LLM after independent ideation preserves writers' autonomy, ownership, and creative self-efficacy compared to using it from the start, while reducing overlap with AI-generated ideas.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.