Nonslop: A Gamified Experiment in Human-AI Collaborative Writing

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.12350v1
• Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2026 17:21:38 GMT
• Title: Nonslop: A Gamified Experiment in Human-AI Collaborative Writing
• Abstract summary: The study focuses on when users choose to maintain creative autonomy versus violating the rules of the game and accepting AI assistance.<n>This gamified approach offers both a framework for studying authentic human-AI interaction and a provocative lens for understanding the tension between efficiency and authenticity in AI-augmented creativity.
• Score: 4.079191726815924
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The rapid proliferation of large language models (LLMs) raises critical questions about human creativity and individual expression in an era of AI-assisted creation. When do humans adopt AI suggestions, and what are the implications for individual voice? This study examines these questions through a gamified writing exercise where 74 participants (214 responses) replied to prompts while AI-generated word suggestions were available as they wrote. The game simulates a dystopian future in which an AI is attempting to learn from what remains of human individuality, and disincentivizes AI-like writing. In doing so, it attempts to create conditions that reveal authentic user preferences rather than default behaviors, such as accepting a readily available AI-generated suggestion. Note that this is a deliberate inversion of the "helpful assistant" design pattern; the system is explicitly forbidding you from accepting AI suggestions. We analyze user behavior patterns across different task types, user behaviors, and response characteristics to understand the factors influencing human-AI interaction in creative tasks. The study focuses on when users choose to maintain creative autonomy versus violating the rules of the game and accepting AI assistance. It also explores how these choices relate to response patterns, task characteristics, and user behavior. This gamified approach offers both a framework for studying authentic human-AI interaction and a provocative lens for understanding the tension between efficiency and authenticity in AI-augmented creativity.

Related papers

• Incentives shape how humans co-create with generative AI [3.182696575286433]
  We show that incentives mediate AI's homogenizing force in a creative writing task.<n>Our results reveal that the effects of generative AI depend not only on the technology itself, but also the behavioral strategies and incentive structures surrounding its use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-04T00:18:51Z)
• Resisting Humanization: Ethical Front-End Design Choices in AI for Sensitive Contexts [1.1565654851982565]
  We argue that humanization in AI front-end design is a value-driven choice that profoundly shapes users' mental models.<n>We discuss two AI systems developed by Chayn, a nonprofit organization supporting survivors of gender-based violence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-25T22:39:16Z)
• How Problematic Writer-AI Interactions (Rather than Problematic AI) Hinder Writers' Idea Generation [18.06791806791819]
  We show that the impact of genAI on students' idea development depends not only on the AI but also on the students and, crucially, their interactions in between.<n>Students who proactively explored ideas gained new ideas from writing, regardless of whether they used auto-complete or Socratic AI assistants.<n>These findings suggest opportunities in designing AI writing assistants, not merely by creating more thought-provoking AI, but also by fostering more thought-provoking writer-AI interactions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-14T22:53:53Z)
• Survey of User Interface Design and Interaction Techniques in Generative AI Applications [79.55963742878684]
  We aim to create a compendium of different user-interaction patterns that can be used as a reference for designers and developers alike. We also strive to lower the entry barrier for those attempting to learn more about the design of generative AI applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-28T23:10:06Z)
• How Performance Pressure Influences AI-Assisted Decision Making [52.997197698288936]
  We show how pressure and explainable AI (XAI) techniques interact with AI advice-taking behavior.<n>Our results show complex interaction effects, with different combinations of pressure and XAI techniques either improving or worsening AI advice taking behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T22:39:52Z)
• Human Bias in the Face of AI: Examining Human Judgment Against Text Labeled as AI Generated [48.70176791365903]
  This study explores how bias shapes the perception of AI versus human generated content.<n>We investigated how human raters respond to labeled and unlabeled content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-29T04:31:45Z)
• Towards Human-AI Deliberation: Design and Evaluation of LLM-Empowered Deliberative AI for AI-Assisted Decision-Making [47.33241893184721]
  In AI-assisted decision-making, humans often passively review AI's suggestion and decide whether to accept or reject it as a whole.<n>We propose Human-AI Deliberation, a novel framework to promote human reflection and discussion on conflicting human-AI opinions in decision-making.<n>Based on theories in human deliberation, this framework engages humans and AI in dimension-level opinion elicitation, deliberative discussion, and decision updates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-25T14:34:06Z)
• Can AI Be as Creative as Humans? [84.43873277557852]
  We prove in theory that AI can be as creative as humans under the condition that it can properly fit the data generated by human creators. The debate on AI's creativity is reduced into the question of its ability to fit a sufficient amount of data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-03T08:49:12Z)
• Learning interactions to boost human creativity with bandits and GPT-4 [10.817205577415434]
  We employ a psychological task that demonstrates limits on human creativity, namely semantic feature generation. In experiments with humans and with a language AI (GPT-4) we contrast behavior in the standard task versus a variant in which participants can ask for algorithmically-generated hints. Humans and the AI show similar benefits from hints, and remarkably, bandits learning from AI responses prefer the same prompting strategy as those learning from human behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T16:53:17Z)
• Exploration with Principles for Diverse AI Supervision [88.61687950039662]
  Training large transformers using next-token prediction has given rise to groundbreaking advancements in AI. While this generative AI approach has produced impressive results, it heavily leans on human supervision. This strong reliance on human oversight poses a significant hurdle to the advancement of AI innovation. We propose a novel paradigm termed Exploratory AI (EAI) aimed at autonomously generating high-quality training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-13T07:03:39Z)
• Improving Human-AI Collaboration With Descriptions of AI Behavior [14.904401331154062]
  People work with AI systems to improve their decision making, but often under- or over-rely on AI predictions and perform worse than they would have unassisted. To help people appropriately rely on AI aids, we propose showing them behavior descriptions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-06T00:33:08Z)
• Cybertrust: From Explainable to Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) [58.981120701284816]
  Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) will incorporate explicit quantifications and visualizations of user confidence in AI recommendations. It will allow examining and testing of AI system predictions to establish a basis for trust in the systems' decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-26T18:53:09Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.