Human intelligence can safeguard against artificial intelligence: individual differences in the discernment of human from AI texts
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) models can produce output that closely mimics human-generated content. We examined individual differences in the human ability to differentiate human- from AI-generated texts, exploring relationships with fluid intelligence, executive functioning, empathy, and digital habits. Overall, participants exhibited better than chance text discrimination, with substantial variation across individuals. Fluid intelligence strongly predicted differences in the ability to distinguish human from AI, but executive functioning and empathy did not. Meanwhile, heavier smartphone and social media use predicted misattribution of AI content (mistaking it for human). Determinations about the origin of encountered content also affected sharing preferences, with those who were better able to distinguish human from AI indicating a lower likelihood of sharing AI content online. Word-level differences in linguistic composition of the texts did not meaningfully influence participants' judgements. These findings inform our understanding of how individual difference factors may shape the course of human interactions with AI-generated information.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 60 · Cited by 38
- Authors
- Chein, J. M., Martinez, S. A., & Barone, A. R.
- Affiliations
- Temple University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Chein, J. M.
- ORCID
- Chein, J. M.
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2024-10-29
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 25989-25989
- ISSN
- 2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC11522284
- OpenAlex
- W4403870620
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 60
- Citations by year
- 2026: 24 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 5.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01 HD098097, R01 HD098097-S)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Authorship Attribution and Profiling
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- AI-generated text detection, individual differences, fluid intelligence, executive function, empathy, digital habits, smartphone use, social media use, linguistic composition, human-AI interaction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
