This study involves an exploration of the evolving dynamics between Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated and human-created artwork with a focus on consumer preference, perceived value, and emotional impact. Experiments were undertaken where participants were asked to evaluate and compare a series of human and AI-produced images without knowing the origins of each. Quantitative data revealed that although human artwork was preferred overall, AI-generated pieces were selected at a rate of nearly 45%, indicating a growing acceptance. Also, the experimental participants consistently assigned a higher monetary value to human art, suggesting that human-created pieces offered some perceptibility to an increase in perceived worth despite a lack of knowledge about the origin of the artwork by participants. Qualitative responses further highlighted the nuanced views of AI’s role in art, acknowledging its potential as a creative tool but cautioning against its use as a replacement for human-driven creativity. This study opens avenues for further exploration into how AI’s integration into creative fields could reshape artistic practices, valuation, and consumer perceptions/practices, and suggests a need for ethical considerations as AI continues to blur the lines between human and machine creativity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hall et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: