arxiv.org web signal

Study: users overestimate AI's time savings on simple tasks

By Published Updated

TL;DR

  • Across three pre-registered studies with 2,691 participants, people frequently chose AI for simple tasks even when it saved no meaningful time or effort.
  • Users underestimated how often they turned to AI and overestimated how much time and effort it saved on cognitively simple work.
  • Within a session, prior AI use led to further AI adoption and entrenched users' miscalibration about time savings, pointing to an overreliance feedback loop.

People reach for AI on arithmetic, spell-check and simple questions even when it saves them no measurable time or effort, according to a new preprint on arXiv from a team including Dan Jurafsky and Robert D. Hawkins. Across three pre-registered studies with 2,691 participants, the authors document what they call an "efficiency-gain illusion."

The miscalibration runs in two directions. The paper reports a "self-estimate miscalibration where people on average believe that they are using AI less than they actually are," alongside an efficiency-gain illusion where users "overestimate how much time and effort savings AI use affords." Both biases point the same way: AI feels like a bigger assistant than it is on cognitively simple work.

The study also identifies a within-session carryover effect, in which "a participant's prior AI use leads to further AI adoption and entrenches their miscalibration about time savings." The authors warn of "the risk of an overreliance feedback loop."

The abstract gives no per-task time figures and does not break results down by AI tool or task type.

Shared on Bluesky by 3 AI experts

Originally reported by arxiv.org

Read the original article →

Original headline: The efficiency-gain illusion: People underestimate the rate of AI use and overestimate its benefits on simple tasks