Nonslop: A Gamified Experiment in Human-AI Collaborative Writing
Summary
This paper presents a gamified experiment where participants write responses with AI suggestions disincentivized, analyzing when humans adopt AI assistance versus maintaining creative autonomy.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 06/11/26, 01:52 PM
# Nonslop: A Gamified Experiment in Human-AI Collaborative Writing Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.12350](https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.12350) [View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2606.12350)[HTML \(experimental\)](https://arxiv.org/html/2606.12350v1) > Abstract:The rapid proliferation of large language models \(LLMs\) raises critical questions about human creativity and individual expression in an era of AI\-assisted creation\. When do humans adopt AI suggestions, and what are the implications for individual voice? This study examines these questions through a gamified writing exercise where 74 participants \(214 responses\) replied to prompts while AI\-generated word suggestions were available as they wrote\. The game simulates a dystopian future in which an AI is attempting to learn from what remains of human individuality, and disincentivizes AI\-like writing\. In doing so, it attempts to create conditions that reveal authentic user preferences rather than default behaviors, such as accepting a readily available AI\-generated suggestion\. Note that this is a deliberate inversion of the "helpful assistant" design pattern; the system is explicitly forbidding you from accepting AI suggestions\. We analyze user behavior patterns across different task types, user behaviors, and response characteristics to understand the factors influencing human\-AI interaction in creative tasks\. The study focuses on when users choose to maintain creative autonomy versus violating the rules of the game and accepting AI assistance\. It also explores how these choices relate to response patterns, task characteristics, and user behavior\. This gamified approach offers both a framework for studying authentic human\-AI interaction and a provocative lens for understanding the tension between efficiency and authenticity in AI\-augmented creativity\. ## Submission history From: Maria Edwards \[[view email](https://arxiv.org/show-email/1df949f5/2606.12350)\] **\[v1\]**Wed, 10 Jun 2026 17:21:38 UTC \(1,268 KB\)
Similar Articles
Not all uses of AI for writing are slop
The author describes using AI to generate questions and a deliberately poor first draft as a technique to overcome writer's block and memory issues, resulting in faster writing without any AI-written text in the final product.
The most interesting AI writing use case might not be writing
The article argues that AI's greatest value in writing may be in aiding cognition and creativity rather than generating finished text, serving as a creativity amplifier.
The sweet spot for AI-assisted writing is 50%
An analysis arguing that the optimal balance for AI-assisted writing is around 50% AI and 50% human input, where AI handles structure and organization while humans provide voice, judgment, and editorial control. The author contends that 100% AI reads as slop while 0% AI leaves capability on the table, and that meaningful AI assistance requires genuine expertise, strong structure, and distinctive human voice.
AI makes me faster. And less myself...
The author reflects on how daily use of AI has led to cognitive offloading, reducing personal reasoning and critical thinking, and invites others to share their experiences via a survey to explore building a tool to mitigate this issue.
The AI-Free Writing Checklist
An open-source checklist of AI giveaway words/phrases to help marketers and writers humanize AI-assisted content.