Change.org AI tool reshaped petitions, didn't boost outcomes

An in-platform "write with AI" tool on Change.org substantially changed the words petitioners used and made petitions more alike, but did not improve whether they succeeded, according to a study published in Nature Human Behaviour.

The paper, by Isabel Corpus, Eric Gilbert, Allison Koenecke and Mor Naaman — researchers at Cornell and the University of Michigan — collected roughly 1.5 million petitions and ran a difference-in-differences analysis around the tool's rollout. At a platform level, the authors write, in-platform AI access "substantially altered the lexical features of petitions and increased petition homogeneity but did not improve petition outcomes."

The result sharpens for returning users. Writers who had already launched one petition and used the AI tool for a second showed "worse outcomes when their second petition is written with access to AI," the authors report. Those repeat writers also produced longer petitions when AI was available: more text, same or worse result.

The authors frame the broader implication plainly. "While AI writing tools can profoundly reshape online content," they write, "their practical utility for improving desired outcomes may be less beneficial than anticipated and introduce unintended consequences such as content homogenization."

Two of the researchers in our tracker pointed to the paper this week.