Listen to this article
Approximately 5 minutes
The audio version of this article was created using text-to-speech, a technology based on artificial intelligence.
Chatbots like ChatGPT can provide direct answers to your questions that seem complete and comprehensive. But new research shows that compared to a regular Google search, the amount of knowledge gained is less.
We are used to searching Google for information when we are working on projects or just chatting and want to check an argument. Google usually responds by directing you to a number of websites related to the topic, which you need to browse to find the information you need.
On the other hand, chatbots, which have access to huge data sets and use large language models, can sift through all this material for you and return an answer in a very conversational, almost personal way. Since a chatbot is programmed to sound like a human and give you comprehensive results, there is a tendency to take it at face value.
A study at the University of Pennsylvania i.e.conducted seven different experiments with more than 10,000 students, asking them to study a topic, such as how to plant a vegetable garden, and then write advice on that topic to a friend. Half a group used regular Google search, the other used the latest version of ChatGPT.
The results were then analyzed to see how much the participants actually learned. and how likely they are to follow their own advice. The researchers found that in all seven experiments, those who used regular Google search presented longer, more thoughtful presentations, using richer and more varied options.language thand those who use ChatGPT. And people who used ChatGPT were generally less informative advice they have given and are less likely to have trust in the advice they gave.
Scientists have concluded that because Google search provides many links on a topic, it takes more mental capacity to understand a subject before writing it down. Different sites may have alternative opinions or suggestions, so users must check the sources of this information and draw their own conclusions.
Even though one experiment used a version of ChatGPT with more links and links, only a quarter of the participants actually clicked on one link. The rest simply accepted any answer.
This study is just one of many similar projects examining the cognitive costs of chatbots. A group at MIT used EEG to peer into the subjects' brains as they wrote the SAT essay. IN preliminary studyThey found that those who used chatbots all wrote similar essays and had the lowest levels of neural activity in the process. They also found that the results were cumulative, such that brain activity decreased further with each successive essay.
Meanwhile, participants who didn't use any technology at all to write their essays showed the highest levels of neural activity and were overall more creative, curious, interested, and satisfied with the end results.
This demonstrates the difference between information and knowledge. We are surrounded by an ocean of information on our computers and devices, but much of it can easily go through one ear and out the other. If it doesn't stick, you haven't learned anything.
Whereas if you actually have to put some thought into it and gather information through research to compile it into a body of knowledge, it is much more likely to stick. You actually learned something.
Clearly, artificial intelligence programs are here to stay. They turn out to be powerful research tools, allowing you to gather details or see patterns in data that people miss. But these results show that critical thinking, fact-checking, and checking sources are still important parts of the process.
I tried this myself on the topic of staying healthy after 70 years old. ChatGPT provided me with a simple list of daily exercise and eating habits to stay fit. Google gave me links to health care pages with much more detailed reading material that explains the aging process, how the body changes with age, and how to properly tailor exercise and diet for older adults.
The end results were the samebut Google's results came from a much richer database, which I looked through myself to see which method worked best. And after searching on Google, I felt more informed than using a chatbot.
Whatever search engine you use, be sure to take the time to think about the results you get and you might actually learn something.
