Cornell study finds AI writing tools did not improve online petition success rates
A Cornell research team analyzed 1.5 million petitions on Change.org to determine the impact of an artificial intelligence writing tool introduced in September.
Analysis covered millions of petitions
Researchers examined a dataset of 1.5 million petitions hosted on the Change.org platform. The study included contributions from Mor Naaman and doctoral student Isabel Corpus at Cornell Tech. Their findings were published in Nature Human Behaviour on September 30.
AI altered text but not results
The artificial intelligence assistance changed the wording of submissions by increasing their length and homogeneity. Despite these changes to the text, the tool failed to improve petition outcomes. The team noted that this result was unexpected given existing research on AI persuasion.
Outcomes remained unchanged overall
The analysis concluded that the effect of the AI writing assistance on final results was negligible at best. Lead author Isabel Corpus stated that the lack of improvement surprised the entire research group. The study suggests platform integration of such tools does not automatically lead to better success rates.
Reported by one outlet
Only one outlet has published this. Nothing here has been checked against a second report, so read it as that outlet's account and follow the link below for the original.
Reported by
1 independent outlet. Headline as published. Links open the original report.