{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,15]],"date-time":"2026-04-15T00:29:18Z","timestamp":1776212958871,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":23,"publisher":"Frontiers Media SA","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,31]],"date-time":"2024-05-31T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1717113600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["frontiersin.org"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Front. Artif. Intell."],"abstract":"<jats:sec><jats:title>Background<\/jats:title><jats:p>While Large Language Models (LLMs) are considered positively with respect to technological progress and abilities, people are rather opposed to machines making moral decisions. But the circumstances under which algorithm aversion or algorithm appreciation are more likely to occur with respect to LLMs have not yet been sufficiently investigated. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate how texts with moral or technological topics, allegedly written either by a human author or by ChatGPT, are perceived.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title><jats:p>In a randomized controlled experiment, <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic> = 164 participants read six texts, three of which had a moral and three a technological topic (predictor text topic). The alleged author of each text was randomly either labeled \u201cChatGPT\u201d or \u201chuman author\u201d (predictor authorship). We captured three dependent variables: assessment of author competence, assessment of content quality, and participants' intention to submit the text in a hypothetical university course (sharing intention). We hypothesized interaction effects, that is, we expected ChatGPT to score lower than alleged human authors for moral topics and higher than alleged human authors for technological topics and vice versa.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results<\/jats:title><jats:p>We only found a small interaction effect for perceived author competence, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic> = 0.004, <jats:italic>d<\/jats:italic> = 0.40, but not for the other dependent variables. However, ChatGPT was consistently devalued compared to alleged human authors across all dependent variables: there were main effects of authorship for assessment of the author competence, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic> &amp;lt; 0.001, <jats:italic>d<\/jats:italic> = 0.95; for assessment of content quality, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic> &amp;lt; 0.001, <jats:italic>d<\/jats:italic> = 0.39; as well as for sharing intention, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic> &amp;lt; 0.001, <jats:italic>d<\/jats:italic> = 0.57. There was also a small main effect of text topic on the assessment of text quality, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic> = 0.002, <jats:italic>d<\/jats:italic> = 0.35.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title><jats:p>These results are more in line with previous findings on algorithm aversion than with algorithm appreciation. We discuss the implications of these findings for the acceptance of the use of LLMs for text composition.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.3389\/frai.2024.1412710","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,31]],"date-time":"2024-05-31T05:01:41Z","timestamp":1717131701000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/crossmark-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":14,"title":["The impact of text topic and assumed human vs. AI authorship on competence and quality assessment"],"prefix":"10.3389","volume":"7","author":[{"given":"Sebastian","family":"Proksch","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Julia","family":"Sch\u00fchle","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Elisabeth","family":"Streeb","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Finn","family":"Weymann","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Teresa","family":"Luther","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Joachim","family":"Kimmerle","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"1965","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,31]]},"reference":[{"key":"B1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"21","DOI":"10.1016\/j.cognition.2018.08.003","article-title":"People are averse to machines making moral decisions","volume":"181","author":"Bigman","year":"2018","journal-title":"Cognition"},{"key":"B2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"32","DOI":"10.1038\/s44271-023-00032-x","article-title":"People devalue generative AI's competence but not its advice in addressing societal and personal challenges","volume":"1","author":"B\u00f6hm","year":"2023","journal-title":"Commun. Psychol."},{"key":"B3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"220","DOI":"10.1002\/bdm.2155","article-title":"A systematic review of algorithm aversion in augmented decision making","volume":"33","author":"Burton","year":"2020","journal-title":"J. Behav. Dec. Making"},{"key":"B4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"33","DOI":"10.1007\/s10916-023-01925-4","article-title":"Evaluating the feasibility of ChatGPT in healthcare: an analysis of multiple clinical and research scenarios","volume":"47","author":"Cascella","year":"2023","journal-title":"J. Med. Syst."},{"key":"B5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"607","DOI":"10.1007\/s11412-023-09409-w","article-title":"Co-constructing knowledge with generative AI tools: reflections from a CSCL perspective","volume":"18","author":"Cress","year":"2023","journal-title":"Int. J. Comput. Support. Collabor. Learn."},{"key":"B6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"81","DOI":"10.54097\/fcis.v2i2.4465","article-title":"The benefits and challenges of ChatGPT: an overview","volume":"2","author":"Deng","year":"2022","journal-title":"Front. Comput. Intell. Syst."},{"key":"B7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"406","DOI":"10.1002\/jcpy.1266","article-title":"Consumers object to algorithms making morally relevant tradeoffs because of algorithms' consequentialist decision strategies","volume":"32","author":"Dietvorst","year":"2022","journal-title":"J. Consum. Psychol."},{"key":"B8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"114","DOI":"10.1037\/xge0000033","article-title":"Algorithm aversion: people erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err","volume":"144","author":"Dietvorst","year":"2015","journal-title":"J. Exper. Psychol."},{"key":"B9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"102642","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642","article-title":"\u201cSo what if ChatGPT wrote it?\u201d Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy","volume":"71","author":"Dwivedi","year":"2023","journal-title":"Int. J. Inf. Manag."},{"key":"B10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"79","DOI":"10.1518\/0018720024494856","article-title":"The perceived utility of human and automated aids in a visual detection task","volume":"44","author":"Dzindolet","year":"2002","journal-title":"Hum. Factors"},{"key":"B11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"100060","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jrt.2023.100060","article-title":"ChatGPT and the rise of generative AI: threat to academic integrity?","volume":"13","author":"Eke","year":"2023","journal-title":"J. Respons. Technol."},{"key":"B12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1145\/3479864","article-title":"Who is the expert?","volume":"5","author":"Hou","year":"2021","journal-title":"Reconciling algorithm aversion and algorithm appreciation in AI-supported decision making. Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Inter."},{"key":"B13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"102274","DOI":"10.1016\/j.lindif.2023.102274","article-title":"ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education","volume":"103","author":"Kasneci","year":"2023","journal-title":"Learn. Indiv. Differ."},{"key":"B14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"100454","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jhlste.2023.100454","article-title":"ChatGPT in practice: increasing event planning efficiency through artificial intelligence","volume":"33","author":"Keiper","year":"2023","journal-title":"J. Hospit. Leisure, Sport Tour. Educ."},{"key":"B15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"106553","DOI":"10.1016\/j.chb.2020.106553","article-title":"Artificial intelligence versus Maya Angelou: experimental evidence that people cannot differentiate AI-generated from human-written poetry","volume":"114","author":"K\u00f6bis","year":"2021","journal-title":"Comput. Hum. Behav."},{"key":"B16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"107445","DOI":"10.1016\/j.chb.2022.107445","article-title":"Automated journalism: the effects of AI authorship and evaluative information on the perception of a science journalism article","volume":"138","author":"Lermann Henestrosa","year":"2023","journal-title":"Comput. Hum. Behav."},{"key":"B17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"353","DOI":"10.3390\/bs14050353","article-title":"Understanding and perception of automated text generation among the public: two surveys with representative samples in Germany","volume":"14","author":"Lermann Henestrosa","year":"2024","journal-title":"Behav. Sci."},{"key":"B18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"90","DOI":"10.1016\/j.obhdp.2018.12.005","article-title":"Algorithm appreciation: people prefer algorithmic to human judgment","volume":"151","author":"Logg","year":"2019","journal-title":"Organiz. Behav. Hum. Dec. Proc."},{"key":"B19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"LutherT.\n            KimmerleJ.\n            CressU.\n          Teaming up with an AI: Exploring human-AI collaboration in a writing scenario with ChatGPT2024","DOI":"10.31219\/osf.io\/extmc"},{"key":"B20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"84","DOI":"10.1177\/10776958221149577","article-title":"Collaborating with ChatGPT: considering the implications of generative artificial intelligence for journalism and media education","volume":"78","author":"Pavlik","year":"2023","journal-title":"J. Mass Commun. Educ."},{"key":"B21","article-title":"\u201cIn-context impersonation reveals Large Language Models' strengths and biases,\u201d","author":"Salewski","year":"2024","journal-title":"Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems"},{"key":"B22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"258","DOI":"10.5281\/zenodo.8151135","article-title":"The impact of artificial intelligence on journalism. Adverse effects vs. benefits","volume":"10","author":"Stanescu","year":"2023","journal-title":"Soc. Sci. Educ. Res. Rev."},{"key":"B23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.48550\/arXiv.2206.07682","article-title":"Emergent abilities of large language models","author":"Wei","year":"2022","journal-title":"arXiv"}],"container-title":["Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence"],"original-title":[],"link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.frontiersin.org\/articles\/10.3389\/frai.2024.1412710\/full","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,7,19]],"date-time":"2024-07-19T10:30:26Z","timestamp":1721385026000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.frontiersin.org\/articles\/10.3389\/frai.2024.1412710\/full"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,31]]},"references-count":23,"alternative-id":["10.3389\/frai.2024.1412710"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/frai.2024.1412710","relation":{},"ISSN":["2624-8212"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2624-8212","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,31]]},"article-number":"1412710"}}