Claim LD09-SL-C15 (v1.0)
In a within-subjects ideation study, ideas produced with ChatGPT were more similar to each other across users than ideas produced with a non-AI creativity aid, but there was no difference at the level of the individual user; the authors conclude the effect comes from the model giving different users similar ideas.
Provenance and status
- Claim type
- ESTIMATE (as printed: “ESTIMATE”)
- Publication status
- ELIGIBLE (QUALIFIED) (as printed: “ELIGIBLE WITH QUALIFIER”)
- Verification state
- CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY (as printed: “CONTENT VERIFIED”; verified by: UNKNOWN)
- Does not license
- Effects in larger or non-academic populations
- Source (field 6, as printed)
- Anderson, Shah & Kreminski, “Homogenization Effects of Large Language Models on Human Creative Ideation,” ACM Creativity & Cognition 2024, arXiv:2402.01536
- Source type (field 7)
- PEER_REVIEWED_CONFERENCE_PAPER (as printed: “Peer-reviewed conference paper”)
- Institutional position
- Independent academic (first author listed as independent; co-authors at Santa Clara University)
- Maturity (claim evidence / publication maturity)
- EMERGING (as printed: “EMERGING”)
- Recorded date
- 2026-10-15
- Currentness / correction
- This is the current version. No correction or concern relation is recorded on its Sources.
Version
Current version v1.0, resolved through the explicit current pointer CLAIM--LD09-SL-C15.
Pinned Sources (field 6, version-specific)
- “Anderson, Shah & Kreminski, “Homogenization Effects of Large Language Models on Human Creative Ideation,” ACM Creativity & Cognition 2024, arXiv:2402.01536” → SRC-SL-ANDERSON-SHAH-KREMINSKI-CC-2024--v1.0 — Anderson, Shah & Kreminski, “Homogenization Effects of Large Language Models on Human Creative Ideation,” ACM Creativity & Cognition 2024, arXiv:2402.01536; class PEER_REVIEWED_CONFERENCE_PAPER (explicit public provenance pin)
All 25 canonical Claim fields (raw values and normalized values)
| # | Canonical field | Canonical value (verbatim) | Normalized (Claim Value Vocabulary v1.0.2) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CLAIM ID | LD09-SL-C15 | — |
| 2 | PUBLIC-FACING CLAIM | In a within-subjects ideation study, ideas produced with ChatGPT were more similar to each other across users than ideas produced with a non-AI creativity aid, but there was no difference at the level of the individual user; the authors conclude the effect comes from the model giving different users similar ideas. | — |
| 3 | CLAIM TYPE | ESTIMATE | base_types: ESTIMATE |
| 4 | RESEARCH STRAND | B — Creative work, writing and ideas | — |
| 5 | MATURITY | EMERGING | states: EMERGING |
| 6 | SOURCE | Anderson, Shah & Kreminski, “Homogenization Effects of Large Language Models on Human Creative Ideation,” ACM Creativity & Cognition 2024, arXiv:2402.01536 | source_ids: SRC-SL-ANDERSON-SHAH-KREMINSKI-CC-2024 |
| 7 | SOURCE TYPE | Peer-reviewed conference paper | classes: PEER_REVIEWED_CONFERENCE_PAPER |
| 8 | INSTITUTIONAL POSITION | Independent academic (first author listed as independent; co-authors at Santa Clara University) | — |
| 9 | SCOPE | Short divergent-thinking tasks (product improvement, improbable consequences) | — |
| 10 | DESIGN | Within-subjects comparison of ChatGPT and a card-based creativity aid (Oblique Strategies) | — |
| 11 | SAMPLE / DATASET | 36 participants recruited through mailing lists and social media; 3 excluded, 33 analysed | — |
| 12 | MODEL / TOOL / VERSION | ChatGPT (GPT-3.5, the May and August 2023 releases) | — |
| 13 | COMPARATOR | The same participants using the card-based aid | — |
| 14 | MAIN RESULT | Group-level semantic similarity higher with ChatGPT; no individual-level difference; ChatGPT users produced more and more detailed ideas but felt less responsible for them | — |
| 15 | INFERENTIAL TARGET | Whether homogenization arises from individual fixation or from a shared source | — |
| 16 | DOES NOT LICENSE | Effects in larger or non-academic populations | — |
| 17 | VERIFICATION STATE | CONTENT VERIFIED | state: CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY · verified_by: UNKNOWN |
| 18 | LIMITATIONS | Small sample; short sessions; one embedding model; 36 recruited, 3 excluded; exact effect statistics not extracted for this version; participants' country not recorded in the source notes; read in the arXiv version 2 of the Creativity & Cognition 2024 paper; the proceedings version was not read | — |
| 19 | CONTRADICTORY / SUPPORTING SOURCES | Not applicable | — |
| 20 | GEOGRAPHY / LANGUAGE | Not checked / English | — |
| 21 | DISTRIBUTIONAL LEDGER | Not recorded | — |
| 22 | R01 / FIELD-MAP LINKS | LD-09, D3 | — |
| 23 | WHAT WOULD CHANGE THIS CLAIM? | A larger study varying whether users see what the model typically suggests | — |
| 24 | PUBLICATION STATUS | ELIGIBLE WITH QUALIFIER | state: ELIGIBLE · qualifiers: QUALIFIED |
| 25 | RECORDED DATE | 2026-10-15 | — |
Field 22 references resolved against Field Map v0.2: LD-09 (LIVING_DEBATE); D3 (DOMAIN)
Cited by Living Debate versions
Research-of-record provenance
Materialized by sociolens-materializer 0.6.0 at 2026-09-28T20:00:00.000Z; normalization contract SocioLens — Claim Value Vocabulary v1.0.2 — Pre-Spike Materialization Contract (v1.0.2). Content seal SHA-256 be33db4c7175e15963d8f97bed00676fc2f8df3f984cafc73cd3a9c7ca29ab6d.
Repository-authored inputs (not Drive exports)
- SocioLens claim — LD09-SL-C15 v1.0 (v1.0) — written in the SocioLens repository by Project Lead (Claude, AI) on 2026-10-15; no Drive identity exists. Authority: AGENTS.md "Authority" (the Project Lead decides research content within the research-integrity rules) and the Owner's choice in the SocioLens project chat on 15 October 2026 to build the LD-09 debate; a new Claim, first version, written from the project's LD-09 source notes, checked against full texts or official abstracts. Block “ENTRY 15 — LD09-SL-C15” SHA-256
e9d33b37bca99e260db35a4e836087b4a401690f3d24fd174d06269146978a8b; fixturefixtures/authored/claims/LD09-SL-C15--v1.0.
Builder decisions (not Drive data)
- VERSION = v1.0 — basis: Claim version taken from the repository-authored claim fixture version (SocioLens claim — LD09-SL-C15 v1.0); the first version of a new Claim of the LD-09 debate
- CURRENT_POINTER = true — basis: repository-authored claim "SocioLens claim — LD09-SL-C15 v1.0" (Project Lead (Claude, AI), 2026-10-15); basis: AGENTS.md "Authority" (the Project Lead decides research content within the research-integrity rules) and the Owner's choice in the SocioLens project chat on 15 October 2026 to build the LD-09 debate; a new Claim, first version, written from the project's LD-09 source notes, checked against full texts or official abstracts
- FIELD_6_SOURCE_REFERENCE = SRC-SL-ANDERSON-SHAH-KREMINSKI-CC-2024--v1.0 — basis: field 6 of ENTRY 15 — LD09-SL-C15 cites "Anderson, Shah & Kreminski, “Homogenization Effects of Large Language Models on Human Creative Ideation,” ACM Creativity & Cognition 2024, arXiv:2402.01536"; the only field-6 segment of this ClaimVersion's repository-authored ledger block.
- SOURCE_PROVENANCE_PIN = SRC-SL-ANDERSON-SHAH-KREMINSKI-CC-2024--v1.0 — basis: explicit version-pinned public provenance of this ClaimVersion (Amendment v1.2 §6): the pinned field-6 Source record "Anderson, Shah & Kreminski, “Homogenization Effects of Large Language Models on Human Creative Ideation,” ACM Creativity & Cognition 2024, arXiv:2402.01536".