[neocritter]

>> "At the very least, this research doesn’t appear to be a reliable indicator of people’s willingness to pay for human-created art."

It's no secret that what does well commercially and what represents good craft doesn't always have much connection. I'm pro-GenAI and still prefer art made by a person. With the aid of AI is fine, but that connection through the choices they make in creating a thing matters to me.

Looking at the actual paper, the story might have biased the results. Would the results be the same if the story wasn't about a story written with the help of AI?

It should be noted the actual study focus is different from how it's framed by the article: "AI Bias for Creative Writing: Subjective Assessment Versus Willingness to Pay"

It seems like the focus was on commercial writing, not writing overall.