Conversational search interfaces, like ChatGPT, offer an interactive, personalized, and engaging user experience compared to traditional search. On the downside, they are prone to cause overtrust issues where users rely on their responses even when they are incorrect. What aspects of the conversational interaction paradigm drive people to adopt it, and how it creates personalized experiences that lead to overtrust, is not clear. To understand the factors influencing the adoption of conversational interfaces, we conducted a survey with 173 participants. We examined user perceptions regarding trust, human-likeness (anthropomorphism), and design preferences between ChatGPT and Google. To better understand the overtrust phenomenon, we asked users about their willingness to trade off factuality for constructs like ease of use or human-likeness. Our analysis identified two distinct user groups: those who use both ChatGPT and Google daily (DUB), and those who primarily rely on Google (DUG). The DUB group exhibited higher trust in ChatGPT, perceiving it as more human-like, and expressed greater willingness to trade factual accuracy for enhanced personalization and conversational flow. Conversely, the DUG group showed lower trust toward ChatGPT but still appreciated aspects like ad-free experiences and responsive interactions. Demographic analysis further revealed nuanced patterns, with middle-aged adults using ChatGPT less frequently yet trusting it more, suggesting potential vulnerability to misinformation. Our findings contribute to understanding user segmentation, emphasizing the critical roles of personalization and human-likeness in conversational IR systems, and reveal important implications regarding users' willingness to compromise factual accuracy for more engaging interactions.

The rise of generative AI tools like ChatGPT has significantly reshaped education, sparking debates about their impact on learning outcomes and academic integrity. While prior research highlights opportunities and risks, there remains a lack of quantitative analysis of student behavior when completing assignments. Understanding how these tools influence real-world academic practices, particularly assignment preparation, is a pressing and timely research priority. This study addresses this gap by analyzing survey responses from 388 university students, primarily from Russia, including a subset of international participants. Using the XGBoost algorithm, we modeled predictors of ChatGPT usage in academic assignments. Key predictive factors included learning habits, subject preferences, and student attitudes toward AI. Our binary classifier demonstrated strong predictive performance, achieving 80.1\% test accuracy, with 80.2\% sensitivity and 79.9\% specificity. The multiclass classifier achieved 64.5\% test accuracy, 64.6\% weighted precision, and 64.5\% recall, with similar training scores, indicating potential data scarcity challenges. The study reveals that frequent use of ChatGPT for learning new concepts correlates with potential overreliance, raising concerns about long-term academic independence. These findings suggest that while generative AI can enhance access to knowledge, unchecked reliance may erode critical thinking and originality. We propose discipline-specific guidelines and reimagined assessment strategies to balance innovation with academic rigor. These insights can guide educators and policymakers in ethically and effectively integrating AI into education.

When Jocelyn Leitzinger had her university students write about times in their lives when they had witnessed discrimination, she noticed that a woman named Sally was the victim in many of the stories. "It was very clear that ChatGPT had decided this is a common woman's name," said Leitzinger, who teaches an undergraduate class on business and society at the University of Illinois in Chicago. "They weren't even coming up with their own anecdotal stories about their own lives," she said. Leitzinger estimated that around half of her 180 students used ChatGPT inappropriately at some point last semester -- including when writing about the ethics of artificial intelligence (AI), which she called both "ironic" and "mind-boggling."

OpenAI is letting some users try a new ChatGPT feature that uses its artificial intelligence to operate a web browser to book trips, buy groceries, hunt for bargains, and do many other online chores. The new tool, called Operator, is an AI agent: It relies on an AI model trained on both text and images to interpret commands and figure out how to use a web browser to execute them. OpenAI claims it has the potential to automate many day-to-day tasks and workday errands. OpenAI's Operator follows rival releases by both Google and Anthropic, which have demonstrated ones capable of using the web. AI agents are widely seen as the next evolutionary stage for AI following chatbots, and many companies have hopped on the hype train by touting them.

ChatGPT has been evidenced to enhance human performance in creative tasks. Yet, it is still unclear if this boosting effect sustains with and without ChatGPT. In a pre-registered seven-day lab experiment and a follow-up survey after 30 days of experiment completion, we examined the impacts of ChatGPT presence and absence on sustained creativity using a text dataset of 3302 creative ideas and 427 creative solutions from 61 college students. Participants in the treatment group used ChatGPT in creative tasks, while those in the control group completed the tasks by themselves. The findings show that although the boosting effect of ChatGPT was consistently observed over a five-day creative journey, human creative performance reverted to baseline when ChatGPT was down on the 7th and the 30th day. More critically, the use of ChatGPT in creative tasks resulted in increasingly homogenized contents, and this homogenization effect persisted even when ChatGPT was absence. These findings pose a challenge to the prevailing argument that ChatGPT can enhance human creativity. In fact, generative AI like ChatGPT lends to human with a temporary rise in creative performance but boxes human creative capability in the long run, highlighting the imperative for cautious generative AI integration in creative endeavors.

Brokerage Daiwa Securities has taken the lead among major financial institutions in the country in adopting the ChatGPT chatbot to help its employees work more efficiently. Daiwa Securities began using ChatGPT, which it has described as having "immense potential," from Wednesday, with an eye to streamlining day-to-day tasks including information gathering in English. The firm also said it hopes to see a reduction in costs and time for preparing outsourcing tasks such as creating documents, leaving employees more time to craft business plans and complete other assignments. This could be due to a conflict with your ad-blocking or security software. Please add japantimes.co.jp and piano.io to your list of allowed sites.

Nearly half of human resource leaders polled by consulting firm Gartner said they're in the process of formulating guidance on employees' use of OpenAI's artificial intelligence chatbot ChatGPT. What those policies will look like may end up varying widely. Some Wall Street firms, like Bank of America and Goldman Sachs Group, have banned the chatbot, while hedge fund giant Citadel has embraced it. This could be due to a conflict with your ad-blocking or security software. Please add japantimes.co.jp and piano.io to your list of allowed sites.

Despite concerns about whether students are using ChatGPT to cheat on exams or as a shortcut to doing their coursework, a new national survey shows students and teachers have quickly incorporated the new technology into their every day lives. Laila Ayala, a student at Comp Sci High in New York City, for instance, has used ChatGPT to research prompts for her debate team on the effect of AI on students, student mental health and whether the SAT and ACT should be abolished. In Kentucky, high school junior Zachary Clifton said he's used ChatGPT to create study guides for some of the college courses he takes at a nearby community college. Even as some school districts ban the artificial intelligence platform – which can quickly answers questions about nearly any subject it's asked – and some college professors find themselves becoming hypervigilant about whether students are using it to cheat, the new survey commissioned by the Walton Family Foundation and conducted by Impact Research found 22% of students use the chatbot to help them with coursework or in extracurricular activities "on a weekly basis or more." And more than half of teachers surveyed reported using ChatGPT at least once since its release, with 40% of teachers using it "at least once a week."

Google Bard and ChatGPT are two of the most prominent artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots available in 2023. Both offer natural language responses to natural language inputs, using machine learning and millions of data points to craft useful, informative responses. These AI tools aren't perfect yet, but they point to an exciting future of AI assistant search and learning tools that will make information all the more readily available. As similar as these chatbots are, they also have some distinct differences. This is a tricky question to answer, as at the time of writing, you can only use Google Bard if you're part of a select group of early beta testers.

ChatGPT is a chat-based language model developed by OpenAI. It is designed to generate human-like text based on a given prompt or conversation, allowing users to engage in natural language conversations with the model. In this beginner's guide, we will explore how ChatGPT works and how it can be used in a variety of applications. I think one of the most underrated risks is probability of a global digital superintelligence godfather -- it could be one AI on a server farm somewhere, that would be the most powerful superintelligent entity on the earth. ChatGPT is a variant of the popular GPT-3 language model, which was also developed by OpenAI. It is designed to generate human-like text based on a given prompt or conversation, allowing users to engage in natural language conversations with the model.