The study reveals a phenomenon researchers call the "more human than human" effect in AI-generated poetry12. Participants consistently rated AI poems higher in qualities like rhythm, beauty, and emotional clarity compared to human-authored works1. This preference for AI-generated content stems from its accessibility and immediate emotional resonance, which appeals to modern readers accustomed to rapid information consumption1.

Key findings include:

• AI poems were more frequently mistaken for human creations than actual human-authored poems32.

• Readers rated AI-generated poems more favorably when unaware of their origin24.

• The simplicity and clarity of AI poems made them more appealing to non-expert readers35.

• Human-authored poems with complex metaphors were often misidentified as machine-generated13.

This effect raises profound questions about creativity, artistry, and the nature of human appreciation for poetry in the digital age12.

AI-generated poems are often perceived as more straightforward and accessible, leading readers to prefer them over more complex human-authored works12. This preference stems from:

• AI's tendency to produce clear, rhythmic, and easily digestible verses13

• Readers mistaking the complexity of human-written poetry for incoherence or AI-generated content23

• Non-expert readers finding AI poems easier to understand and interpret24

This phenomenon highlights a potential shift in poetic appreciation, where simplicity and immediate emotional resonance may be valued over the layered metaphors and nuanced themes often found in traditional human-authored poetry15. However, this preference for simplicity raises questions about the longevity and depth of AI-generated works compared to the enduring nature of complex human poetry1.

Despite the tendency to prefer AI-generated poems when unaware of their origin, a significant bias toward human-created works emerges when authorship is revealed. This phenomenon, observed in the study by researchers at the University of Pittsburgh, highlights the complex interplay between perception and preconception in artistic appreciation:

• Participants who were informed that poems were AI-generated consistently gave lower ratings across 13 characteristics, regardless of actual authorship1.

• This bias reflects a cultural resistance to accepting AI as a legitimate creative force, with Porter speculating that "people will never fully accept AI-generated poetry — or even AI-generated art in general"2.

• The preference for human-authored works when labeled as such suggests a deeply ingrained belief in the superiority of human creativity, despite evidence of AI's capability to produce emotionally resonant and aesthetically pleasing poetry34.

This bias underscores the ongoing challenge AI faces in gaining acceptance in creative fields, even as it demonstrates the ability to produce work that is often indistinguishable from, or preferred over, human-authored poetry when judged blindly.