- 39% of people change the way they write so it doesn’t sound like AI
- About a third say they would stop supporting their colleagues or creators because of undisclosed use of AI.
- People still think it’s okay to use AI for brainstorming, research and editing
A major study conducted in the US, UK, EU and Latin America has revealed the impact of AI on consumers, both in terms of how they produce content and how they judge authenticity – what looks like AI has now become a social stigma, a new report from Use.AI reveals.
Although AI promises to improve productivity by automating some inefficient administrative workloads, nearly three-fifths (58%) of the more than 12,600 respondents said they had seen someone criticized online or in their workplace for using AI.
To the point where almost half (46%) now worry that their own writing could be mistaken for AI-generated content, with 39% specifically changing the way they write to not sound like AI.
How to spot AI-generated content
Perfect to the point of not appearing human is generally how people can characterize AI-generated content – this includes excellent grammar, predictable transitions, and emotionally neutral text.
But workers are taking notice, as many are now modifying AI results to make them more human-like by shortening sentences, adding small imperfections, and removing long hyphens that AI tools still seem obsessed with using.
“Creative workers face the most acute version of the problem,” Use.AI warns, pointing out that their impeccable work can actually be seen as negative, due to its connotation with being AI-generated, even if it is not.
And it doesn’t stop at judgment: around a third say they would think less of a colleague, creator, or classmate if AI had been used without full disclosure (35%) and would therefore be less likely to support a creator (34%).
“AI can be used to flood platforms with cheap content,” says the report, highlighting the importance of authenticity, education and disclosure in good journalism.
The report also highlights social media platforms like LinkedIn. The platform’s existing style of crisp opening lines, short paragraphs, polished career lessons, humble authority, and controlled vulnerability is often confused with AI-generated posts.
Where can AI be used?
Although generating a complete job is generally frowned upon, consumers remain supportive of AI from the earliest stages of the job. For example, three in five (62%) say that using AI for editing, brainstorming and research should simply be considered part of modern digital culture.
However, this recently revealed widespread distrust and dissatisfaction with AI comes at a cost:
“Use the tool, but don’t leave any fingerprints. Be efficient, but not in a suspicious way. Write clearly, but not too neatly. Know things, but not in a way that seems put together.”
Use.AI is not so much concerned that AI makes weak work appear competent, but rather that truly skilled individuals start reducing the quality of their work to appear “less AI.”
But more importantly, this study broadly aligns with a growing number of others, even if it reaches a similar conclusion from a different starting point. AI delivers on its promise to improve efficiency by giving creators access to information or delivering curated content in just a few seconds, but much of that time is then undone as the people involved take it upon themselves to refine the result – in this case, to make it more human.
Follow TechRadar on Google News And add us as your favorite source to get our news, reviews and expert opinions in your feeds.
