Good morning,

Whenever I use AI as I write, my attitude is generally, “You think you’re better than me? Let’s see how you’d phrase this.” More often than not, I leave these interactions feeling slightly better about my own creative abilities.

It’s my strange little way of “competing” with the robots. Apparently, there’s something to that.

This week, research from Jacob Teeny, an associate professor of marketing at Kellogg, finds that AI can inadvertently make us more confident in our own creative abilities. It’s a fresh perspective on our developing relationship to AI as advocates envision a future where the technology enhances, rather than replaces, human work.

Plus, what will capitalism in the U.S. look like in 50 years?

Knock knock. Who’s there? Generative AI.

If you heard a comedian deliver a half-way decent joke and later found out that it was produced by generative AI, would you feel more confident in your own ability to do stand-up comedy?

Teeny and Taly Reich at NYU ran a series of experiments in which they assessed people’s self-confidence in their creative ability after exposure to creative works produced by AI or created by a human. The researchers consistently found that people were more confident in their ability to complete a creative task after they saw the exact same work being credited to AI versus a human.

In large part, this response stemmed from a preconceived notion that AI is less creatively capable than humans.

“Much of our self-perceptions are based on how we compare ourselves to others,” Teeny says. While AI isn’t human, people tend to view it as such when comparing its abilities to their own. Consequently, because many people hold a preconceived notion that AI isn’t particularly good at creative work, exposure to AI-generated content can boost their self-confidence.

The findings have practical implications across settings.

In marketing, for example, “if you’re trying to get people to come up with a new marketing idea, you could show them what generative AI produced and say, ‘See if you can’t come up with something better,’” Teeny says. It could get the confidence ball rolling.

Read more at Kellogg Insight.

The future of U.S. capitalism?

Asked what U.S. capitalism might look like 50 years from now, Carola Frydman, a professor of finance at Kellogg, says it may be shaped less by unfettered competition and more by strategic government oversight.

Frydman tells The Wall Street Journal that, “as market power concentrates in a few dominant firms, policymakers are likely to strengthen antitrust enforcement” to protect competition and spark innovation. However, she adds, current antitrust law would need to be overhauled to keep up with the modern tech economy.

Simultaneously, the existing cooperation between government and business could deepen in sectors central to national security and global leadership, such as semiconductors and defense. Control likely wouldn’t be centralized, as it is in other countries—instead, she says, an American system would promote collaboration between independent agencies and private firms.

“The result could be a form of state capitalism with distinct American design—one that doesn’t replace market forces but harnesses them for national prosperity in an increasingly competitive world,” Frydman says.

Read the full article in The Wall Street Journal.

“In today’s classrooms, workplaces, and communities, that’s the kind of courage we need to celebrate. Not just speaking loudly, but speaking thoughtfully. Not just disagreeing, but offering perspectives grounded in listening, studying, research, and lived expertise.”

See you next week,

Laura Pavin, multimedia editor
Kellogg Insight