AI support during drafting lowers ownership substantially more than support during planning or revision, and planning support preserves more ownership than revision support.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 2 studies · 2 causal r2 · q3
Currency · no dated study recorded · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The ai draft condition differed from the average of ai plan and ai revision by −1.65 ownership points (p<.001). → Gero et al. 2026 q3 i? Planning support preserved more ownership than revision support (+0.73 points, p=.0016). → Gero et al. 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Gero et al. 2026¶

Katy Ilonka Gero, Tao Long, Carly Schnitzler, and Paramveer S. Dhillon. 2026. From Planning to Revision: How AI Writing Support at Different Stages Alters Ownership. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS '26), June 13–17, 2026, Singapore, Singapore. ACM, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3800645.3813003

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Pre-planned contrast C2 from the between-subjects experiment (n=253) on prompt-adjusted ownership means: "assistance during drafting lowers ownership substantially more than assistance during planning or revision." Only the raw contrast estimate (−1.65 ownership points) and its p-value were printed; no test statistic and no standardized effect size.

"C2(ai–draftvs. the average ofai–planandai–revision) was −1.65points (𝑝<. 001), showing that assistance during drafting lowers ownership substantially more than assistance during planning or revision."

Gero et al. 2026 (2)¶

Katy Ilonka Gero, Tao Long, Carly Schnitzler, and Paramveer S. Dhillon. 2026. From Planning to Revision: How AI Writing Support at Different Stages Alters Ownership. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS '26), June 13–17, 2026, Singapore, Singapore. ACM, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3800645.3813003

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Pre-planned contrast C3 directly comparing ai plan to ai revision on the ownership outcome in the same n=253 experiment, indicating "planning preserves more ownership than revision." No standardized effect size was printed.

"C3(ai–planvs.ai–revision) was +0.73points (𝑝=. 0016), indicating planning preserves more ownership than revision."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Essay quality was highest for AI-generated drafts and lowest with no AI, negatively correlated with ownership, suggesting an ownership-quality tradeoff. — related
• Any AI writing support decreases feelings of ownership compared to no AI support, with ownership following a gradient by stage (highest with no AI, then planning, revision, and AI-generated draft lowest). — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• AI support shifts perceived attribution of ideas and text toward the AI, most strongly for AI-generated drafts, and an AI draft based on the writer's own outline contributed more ideas than expected (27%). — related
• In this experiment, drafts—human-written or AI-generated—anchored the final essay, with AI-generated drafts revised somewhat more but underlying phrases largely retained across conditions. — related
• Planning-stage AI ideas were often redundant with or rejected in favor of writers' own ideas: idea attribution was 17.8% among users versus 2.9% among non-users, but ownership did not differ between users and non-users within ai plan. — related
• ChatGPT-assisted students reported substantially lower ownership of their submitted code across self-attributed ownership, psychological ownership, and authorship attribution — related
• Evaluators attribute substantially less ownership to writers who used GenAI ideas, but impose only a marginal profit-sharing penalty — related