Overall, this study reveals a fundamental tension at the heart of transparency regulation: by disclosing GenAI use through a simple label, regulators may inadvertently diminish the very human creative agency they aim to protect, and they do so before audiences ever see the label.
Abstract
Regulators increasingly mandate transparency regarding generative AI (GenAI) use in creative work, aiming to protect audiences from deception while preserving creators' self-expression. One way of achieving this transparency is through disclosure labels that directly inform audiences about GenAI use. Yet, prior research focused almost exclusively on how such labels affect audience evaluations and paid surprisingly little attention to whether mandatory disclosure affects creators, too. We refer to this as the indirect disclosure effect. Drawing on Goffman's account of impression management, we theorize that creators who anticipate disclosure fear that audiences will not recognize their human creative agency, threatening their validation as a creative self, which leads them to adjust their collaboration with GenAI. To investigate this mechanism, we employ two nested mixed-methods experiments in which participants collaborate with a text-to-image GenAI tool under different disclosure conditions. We empirically establish the indirect disclosure effect: when disclosure is anticipated, the majority of creators withdraw from the creative process, leaving image generation to GenAI. We provide evidence that this withdrawal is driven by creators’ fears that audiences will not recognize their creative agency. Hence, the produced artifacts predominantly reflect computational rather than human creativity, which is also recognized and evaluated by the audience regardless of the direct disclosure label. Overall, our study reveals a fundamental tension at the heart of transparency regulation: by disclosing GenAI use through a simple label, regulators may inadvertently diminish the very human creative agency they aim to protect, and they do so before audiences ever see the label.
As generative AI becomes embedded in advertising production and mandatory AI disclosure requirements expand globally, brands face a structural challenge: disclosure of AI authorship can erode perceived authenticity. This study examined whether voluntary flaw disclosure counteracts this deficit in AI-generated adverti...
Mincheol Kim· Frontiers in Psychology· 0 citations
The growing role of AI-generated content and AI-enabled systems in public communication has led regulators to demand clear disclosure of content provenance and AI involvement. But the effects of such disclosures remain uncertain. We test two disclosure approaches in their impact on an AI chatbot's persuasive appeal. In...
Adrian Rauchfleisch, Andreas Jungherr· 0 citations
This study explores how varying degrees of disclosure of artificial intelligence information affect users' trust and behavioral intentions on Chinese digital platforms. Based on recent controlled experiments, eye-tracking research, and statistics, this paper finds that the disclosure of artificial intelligence informat...
Yiyu Pan· Communications in Humanities...· 0 citations
Communities often respond to potentially AI-assisted work by asking three questions: Was AI used? Was that use disclosed? Can hidden use be detected? These questions place AI use itself at the center of accountability while overlooking a deeper problem: unowned judgment. Evaluations, claims, decisions, and creative dir...
Heng-Zhi Ye· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.