AI vs. Human Creativity: Who Dominates the Art World?

November 18, 2023 Gavin Coates

The images in this article were made by giving AI generated text to an AI art generator.

While biases against AI-made art exist, it can be used as a tool to enhance human creativity. Collaboration potential between AI and artists challenges fears of AI dominance, opening new avenues for creative exploration.

The contemporary art world, a $65 billion USD market employing millions globally, is undergoing a transformation with the integration of AI-made art into prestigious galleries and museums. This shift has sparked debates on the evaluation of AI art compared to human-made art and its potential impact on perceptions of human creativity. Addressing these questions, recent research by C. Blaine Horton Jr, Michael W. White, and Sheena S. Iyengar sheds light on the biases against AI-made art and their implications for human creativity.

Explore our curated selection of contemporary artists from around the globe.

Naturalist Gallery offers artist representation internationally. Apply your art.

Key Findings

Devaluation of AI-Made Art: Participants consistently devalue art labeled as AI-made across various dimensions, even when indistinguishable from human-made art. This bias persists regardless of participants' feelings towards AI or their background in art or technology. Notably, the devaluation is more pronounced in evaluations of skill and monetary value, reflecting historical patterns seen in other industries undergoing automation.
Enhancement of Human Creativity Through Comparison: Surprisingly, the research reveals that art labeled as human-made is perceived as more creative when compared to AI-made art. This finding suggests a potential avenue for human artists to benefit from comparisons, using AI as a tool to highlight or accentuate their creative capacities. This challenges concerns about AI devaluing human artistic efforts and introduces a positive perspective on the collaborative potential of humans and AI in the art-making process.
Impact of Collaborative Art: Art described as collaboratively made, involving both human artists and AI programs, is perceived as less valuable than human-made art but more valuable than AI-made art. The study highlights that the bias against AI-labeled artwork persists even when the AI functions only as a human aid. However, when the collaboration is compared to human references, perceptions of the human artist's contribution increase, suggesting that human artists working with AI can benefit from drawing comparisons between their collaborative output and AI-generated art.

Experimental Insights

Experiment 1: In a within-subject design, participants evaluated images labeled as AI-made less favorably across various dimensions, emphasizing the devaluation effect.
Experiment 2: A between-subjects design confirmed the devaluation bias, particularly on dimensions of skill and monetary value. Participants were less likely to classify AI-labeled images as art.
Experiment 3: By randomizing the order of image labels, Experiment 3 showed that exposure to AI-made art positively impacted evaluations of human effort, countering concerns about the devaluation of human creativity.
Experiment 4: Building on Experiment 3, Experiment 4 demonstrated that direct comparisons between art labeled as human and AI-made increased perceptions of human creativity, emphasizing the potential positive effects of juxtaposing human and AI art.

View limited edition prints by contemporary artists at Naturalist Gallery.

The research provides valuable insights into the psychological dynamics surrounding the evaluation of AI and human-made art. While biases against AI art are evident, the experiments uncover opportunities for enhancing perceptions of human creativity through strategic comparisons. This nuanced understanding encourages further exploration of the collaborative potential between human artists and AI, challenging prevailing anxieties about the devaluation of human artistic endeavors in the age of automation.