Why People Favor Artists Over AI: The Human Touch

Published Date : 7/9/2025 

A recent survey reveals that while AI is becoming increasingly adept at creating art, the majority of people still prefer human-created works. This article explores the emotional and psychological reasons behind this preference. 

Think of your favorite piece of art—a painting, a song, a novel, a movie, or even a video game—and try to remember why it made such a strong impression on you. Was it the color, the cadence of notes, the way the writer made you feel understood, or the deep emotion of the actors?

Now imagine that artificial intelligence created it. The question might seem flippant, yet this is the future toward which we are racing. Over the past few years, AI developers have improved the technology’s ability to create art across nearly every field: not just writing, digital art, photos, and videos, but also three-dimensional models, dance choreography, and architectural designs. With AI so rapidly learning to produce art forms previously considered the exclusive domain of human ingenuity, we thought it important to understand how people view this transformation.

We each approached this question from different backgrounds. One of us (Béchard) is a journalist and fiction writer who has been publishing novels for 20 years, and the other (Kreiman) is a professor at Harvard Medical School who researches the intersection between biological and artificial systems. Earlier this year, we conducted a survey on AI art using Prolific, an online platform that pays people to participate in research. The only restriction we placed was that the respondents reside in the U.S. We enrolled 150 people. What we found has not yet been published or peer-reviewed.

The results were striking. The majority of people who participated disliked the idea of AI-generated art and held the view that human art has an emotional depth that machines either can’t or shouldn’t reproduce. Yet they were open to AI-generated art so long as there was an artist involved, heavily guiding and prompting their chosen platform. At a moment when we face a deluge of AI-generated content, we believe that AI companies should heed these data and focus on what people value—rather than create systems that generate large volumes of art, they should design better tools to give people the power to convey their unique artistic visions. In doing this, their platforms could make creative expression more accessible and egalitarian in a world where creating art comes with barriers for many people. In this way, AI could emerge as another path for human expression.

We first asked people to name their favorite work of art. Answers included J. D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye, J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Fellowship of the Ring, Vincent van Gogh’s The Starry Night, and Gustav Klimt’s The Kiss, as well as the musical Hamilton, the TV shows Gilmore Girls, Twin Peaks, and Game of Thrones, and music by the Beatles, Metallica, and Cat Stevens. Then we asked how they would feel upon learning that their favorite work of art was generated by AI with no humans involved, not even real actors in films. Responses ranged from outrage to enthusiasm. More than 62 percent said they would like the art less, 32 percent said that their feelings wouldn’t change, and nearly 5 percent said that they would like it more.

In comments, a devotee of Good Will Hunting expressed horror, calling the movie “a masterpiece of the human experience” that “no AI could ever come close to replicating.” Many bluntly declared that AI art isn’t “real,” that it is manipulative, inauthentic, and, of course, artificial. Then there were the pragmatists, who shrugged and argued that if the artwork touches your soul, why fuss about the creator—or lack thereof? One respondent even welcomed the idea of AI-generated TV, envisioning the dream scenario for an insatiable binge-watcher: endless episodes churned out by algorithms.

The reactions, however, went deeper. When asked if there is a difference between the emotional value of human and AI art, 81 percent said yes, reminding us that we seek the human experience in art. We want to know if an artist drew from personal experience or imagination. We pause while reading a book to learn about its author, and we follow the lives of singers and actors. Art, after all, is a way humans communicate. To wit: art “is the most universal and freest form of communication,” philosopher John Dewey said in his book Art as Experience; “You think your pain and your heartbreak are unprecedented in the history of the world, but then you read,” civil rights activist James Baldwin told Life magazine in a 1963 interview.

But if great art is forged from human hope, desire, disappointment, and sorrow, what does creativity mean in a world with increasingly powerful AI? Are people who use AI, versus paint, film, or even a word processor, artists? We asked this. Thirteen percent said yes, another 13 percent were unsure, and 31 percent said no, whereas 42 percent selected “yes, but only if they are providing significant guidance to the AI; otherwise, no.” These responses shed light on why so many people, in person and online, complain about AI-generated “slop.” What participants are often pointing out is the impersonal, almost meaningless nature of AI: the online posts hyping an idea in generic language, the onslaught of images that say little about the person posting them beyond their ability to write a short prompt and hit send. But many of the respondents in our survey appeared more open to the idea of people using AI as a tool—an electronic quill or paintbrush—to help bring their artistic vision into the world. 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQS): 

Q: What was the main finding of the survey on AI-generated art?

A: The main finding was that the majority of people disliked the idea of AI-generated art and believed that human art has an emotional depth that AI can't replicate.

Q: Why do people prefer human-created art over AI-generated art?

A: People prefer human-created art because they seek the human experience in art, including the emotional depth and personal touch that comes from an artist's personal experiences and imagination.

Q: What percentage of survey respondents said they would like AI-generated art less?

A: More than 62 percent of survey respondents said they would like AI-generated art less.

Q: How can AI companies better serve people's artistic preferences?

A: AI companies can better serve people's artistic preferences by designing tools that allow artists to heavily guide and prompt AI platforms, rather than creating systems that generate large volumes of art without human input.

Q: What is the role of AI in the future of art according to the survey?

A: The survey suggests that AI can serve as a tool to enhance human creativity and make artistic expression more accessible, rather than replacing human artists entirely. 

More Related Topics :