ChatGPT is melting our brainpower, killing creativity, and making us soulless — or so the headlines imply. We dig into the study behind the claims, starting with quirky bar charts and mysterious sample sizes, then winding through hairball-like brain diagrams and tens of thousands of statistical tests. Our statistical sleuthing leaves us with questions, not just about the results, but about whether this was science’s version of a first date that looked better on paper.

Statistical topics

ANOVA
Bar graphs
Data visualization
False Discovery Rate correction
Multiple testing
Preprints
Statistical Sleuthing

Methodological morals

"Treat your preprints like your blind dates. Show up showered and with teeth brushed."
"Always check your N. Then check it again."
"Never make a bar graph that just shows p-values. Ever."

Link to paper

Kristin and Regina’s online courses:

Programs that we teach in:

Epidemiology and Clinical Research Graduate Certificate Program

Find us on:

Kristin - LinkedIn & Twitter/X

Regina - LinkedIn & ReginaNuzzo.com

(00:00) - Intro
(03:46) - Media coverage of the study
(08:35) - The experiment
(12:09) - Sample size issues
(13:11) - Bar chart sleuthing
(19:15) - Blind date analogy
(23:51) - Interview results
(30:01) - Simple text analysis results
(34:01) - Natural language processing results
(40:57) - N-gram and ontology analysis results
(45:52) - Teacher evaluation results
(52:27) - Neuroimaging analysis
(01:00:29) - Multiple testing and connectivity issues
(01:06:07) - Brain adaptation results
(01:09:44) - Wrap-up, rating, and methodological morals

Your Brain on AI: Is ChatGPT making us mentally lazy?