Strategic Studies of Art

Strategic Studies of Art

Comparing the values of creativity between human-produced and artificial intelligence-produced artworks: Analytical studies on audience perception

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
alaheh ghafari balani 1
Farnoush Manavi 2
1 Master’s degree holder in Information Technology Engineering, Department of Information Systems Management, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran. Email: alahe.ghafari@hafez.shirazu.ac.ir
2 Assistant Professor at Computer Science and Engineering and Information Technology Department, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran. (Corresponding Author) Email: f.manavi@cse.shirazu.ac.ir
10.22083/ssa.2026.579414.1127
Abstract
Introduction: “The rapid advancement of generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has significantly transformed the landscape of artistic production, raising fundamental questions about the nature of creativity, authenticity, authorship, and artistic value. As AI-generated artworks become increasingly sophisticated and accessible, debates have emerged regarding whether machine-generated outputs can be considered genuinely creative or whether creativity remains an inherently human capacity rooted in lived experience, intentionality, and cultural context. These discussions are particularly relevant in fields where artistic expression is closely connected to cultural heritage and personal expression, such as Persian calligraphy and calligraphic paintings.
This study aims to compare the perceived creative value of human-created artworks and AI-generated artworks by examining audience perceptions of both forms. Focusing on Iranian calligraphy and calligraphic paintings, the research investigates how viewers evaluate artworks across several dimensions, including originality, creativity, emotional impact, emotional expression, aesthetic quality, typographic structure, and cultural relevance. By exploring audience responses to both human and AI-generated artistic productions, the study seeks to contribute to contemporary discussions on the evolving relationship between art, technology, and creativity.”
Methods: This research employed an analytical-comparative approach using both quantitative and qualitative methods. A selection of human-created artworks, primarily consisting of Persian calligraphy and calligraphic paintings, was chosen as the basis for comparison. These artworks were subsequently recreated using generative AI tools to produce corresponding AI-generated versions while maintaining similar visual themes and stylistic characteristics.
Data were collected through a structured questionnaire containing both closed-ended and open-ended questions. The study involved 100 participants representing diverse levels of artistic knowledge and experience, including art students, professional artists and art experts, and members of the general public. This diverse sample was selected to ensure a broad range of perspectives and to provide a realistic representation of audience perceptions.
Participants were asked to evaluate both human-created and AI-generated artworks according to predefined criteria, including originality, creativity, emotional impact, emotional expression, aesthetic appeal, quality of lettering and composition, and cultural compatibility. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistical methods and mean score comparisons, while qualitative responses were examined through thematic analysis to identify recurring perceptions and interpretive patterns.
Results: The findings indicate that AI-generated artworks possess notable strengths in terms of visual diversity, technical execution, stylistic variation, and production speed. Many participants acknowledged the ability of AI systems to generate visually appealing and innovative compositions that can successfully imitate artistic styles and produce aesthetically engaging results.
However, human-created artworks consistently received higher evaluations in areas related to cultural authenticity, emotional depth, personal expression, and the communication of lived experience. Participants frequently associated human artworks with intentionality, artistic identity, and meaningful emotional narratives that were perceived as less evident in AI-generated works. The results suggest that viewers often interpret creativity as more than the production of novel visual forms; they also connect it to human experience, cultural memory, and the conscious intentions of the artist.
Qualitative analysis further revealed that participants viewed AI as a powerful creative tool rather than an independent creative agent. While AI-generated artworks were appreciated for their efficiency and visual innovation, many respondents questioned their capacity to convey genuine emotions or cultural understanding without human guidance. The audience generally perceived the artistic value of AI-generated works as dependent upon the creative input, direction, and decision-making processes of human users.
Discussion: The results of this study highlight the continuing significance of human creativity in artistic production despite the growing capabilities of generative AI technologies. Although AI systems demonstrate remarkable potential for generating visually sophisticated and aesthetically compelling artworks, they are not perceived by audiences as fully replacing the cultural, emotional, and experiential dimensions that characterize human artistic expression.
The findings suggest that creativity in the age of artificial intelligence should be understood as a collaborative process rather than a competitive relationship between humans and machines. AI functions most effectively as a creative partner that expands artistic possibilities while remaining dependent on human intention, interpretation, and cultural awareness. Consequently, the concept of creativity requires reconsideration within contemporary technological contexts, recognizing both the innovative capacities of AI and the irreplaceable contributions of human experience.
This research contributes to interdisciplinary discussions at the intersection of art, technology, aesthetics, and audience studies, and provides a foundation for future investigations into the evolving role of artificial intelligence in artistic creation and evaluation.
Keywords
Audience Perception
Authenticity
creativity
Information Technology
human art
AI-Generated Art
Subjects
پاپی، فاطمه و ابوالقاسم دادور (1403). بررسی نقش و کاربرد هوش مصنوعی در خلق آثار هنری نوین و چگونگی تغییر رویکردهای هنری در دوره دیجیتال، مطالعات هنر، 3(1)، 31-63.
https://doi.org/10.22083/ssa.2025.480976.1047
جعفری‌زاده، فاطمه، نصیری‌زاده، زهرا و زهرا وحیدی (1404). روایت هنرمندان از اثرات هوش مصنوعی بر هنر، سیویلیکا.                         https://en.civilica.com/doc/2387835/
گنجی کامران، اسلامی، جواد، قادری (زرشاه)، سجاد، کوچک اندام، سیمین و امیر حسین مدنی (1404). هنر دیجیتال و تأثیرات آن بر فرهنگ معاصر ایران: با تمرکز بر بازنمایی هویت فرهنگی. سیویلیکا.
https://civilica.com/doc/2469957
هادیان، جمال (2025). نقش تداعی آزاد در خلاقیت هنری. بازیابی‌شده ازhttps://andishemoaser.ir
هادیان، جمال (2025). تداعی آزاد در هنر: اصل مجاورت، مشابهت و تباین. خبرناب.
https://www.khabarnab.com/art/174876985919/artificial-intelligence-tool-or-threat-iranian-artists-and-researchers-answer-persian-language-exposed-to-gradual-elimination-of-digital-space
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Westview Press.
Anantrasirichai, N. & Bull, D. (2022). Artificial intelligence in the creative industries: A review. Artificial Intelligence Review, 55(1), 589-656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-021-10042-7
Boden, M. A. (2004). The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Brewer, P. R., Cuddy, L., Dawson, W., & Stise, R. (2025). Artists or art thieves? Media use, media messages, and public opinion about artificial intelligence image generators. AI & Society, 40, 77-87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01854-3
Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shinn, N., et al. (2020). Language models are few-shot learners. Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2020). https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.14165
Canby, S. R. (2014). Persian painting. Thames & Hudson.
Cheng, M. (2022). The creativity of artificial intelligence in art. Proceedings, 81(1), 110. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2022081110
Cropley, D. H. (2025). “The Cat Sat on the …?” Why generative AI has limited creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 59(4), Article e70077. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.70077 
de Bono, E. (1970). Lateral thinking: A textbook of creativity (A. Aram, Trans.). Hermes Publishing. (Original work published 1970)
Dutton, D. (2009). The art instinct: Beauty, pleasure, and human evolution. Bloomsbury Press.
Elgammal, A., Liu, B., Elhoseiny, M., & Mazzone, M. (2017). Creative adversarial networks: Generating “art” by learning about styles and deviating from style norms. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.07068
Epstein, Z., Hertzmann, A., Herman, L., Mahari, R., Frank, M. R., Groh, M., Schroeder, H., Smith, A., Akten, M., Fjeld, J., Farid, H., Leach, N., Pentland, A., & Russakovsky, O. (2023). Art and the science of generative AI: A deeper dive. Science, 380(6650), 1110-1111. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adh4451 
Gatys, L. A., Ecker, A. S., & Bethge, M. (2015). A neural algorithm of artistic style. Journal of Vision, 16(12), 2086-2100. https://doi.org/10.1167/16.12.1
Gaut, B. (2010). The philosophy of creativity. Philosophy Compass, 5(12), 1034-1046. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-9991.2010.00351.x
Gajewska, E. (2025). The Lovelace Test of Intelligence: Can humans recognize and esteem AI generated art? Preprint. (arXiv)
Gombrich, E. H. (2000). The story of art (16th ed.). Phaidon Press.
Goodfellow, I., Pouget-Abadie, J., Mirza, M., Xu, B., Warde-Farley, D., Ozair, S., Courville, A. C., & Bengio, Y. (2014). Generative adversarial nets. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2014), 27, 2672-2680. https://papers.nips.cc/paper/5423-generative-adversarial-nets.pdf
Ganji Kamran, Eslami, J., Qadri (Zarshah), S., Kouchandam, S.Madani ,A. (1404). Digital Art and Its Effects on Contemporary Iranian Culture: Focusing on the Representation of Cultural Identity. Civicahttps://civilica.com/doc/2469957 [in Persian] 
Grig, A. (2024). The impact of AI on artistic perception. Medium. https://aliyagrig.medium.com/the-impact-of-ai-on-artistic-perception-825228b1c2f6
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5(9), 444-454.
Haase, J., & Hanel, P. H. P. (2023). Artificial muses: Generative artificial intelligence chatbots have risen to human-level creativity. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12003
Hadian, Jamal (2025). Free association in art: the principle of proximity, similarity and contrast. Khabranab. https://www.khabarnab.com/art/174876985919/artificial-intelligence-tool-or-threat-iranian-artists-and-researchers-answer-persian-language-exposed-to-gradual-elimination-of-digital-space [in Persian]
Hadian, J. (2025). The role of free association in artistic creativity. Retrieved fromhttps://andishemoaser.ir [in Persian]
Hall, J., & Schofield, D. (2025). The value of creativity: Human produced art vs. AI-generated art. Art and Design Review, 13(1), 65-88. https://doi.org/10.4236/adr.2025.131006
Hertzmann, A. (2020). Can computers create art? Arts, 9(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts9020036
Holland, J. H. (1975). Adaptation in natural and artificial systems: An introductory analysis with applications to biology, control, and artificial intelligence. University of Michigan Press.
Jafarizadeh, Fatemeh, Nasirizadeh, Zahra, Vahidi, Zahra (1404). Artists’ narratives of the effects of artificial intelligence on art. Civilicahttps://en.civilica.com/doc/2387835/. 
[in Persian] 
Kant, I. (2000). Critique of the power of judgment. Cambridge University Press.
Kingma, D. P., & Welling, M. (2014). Auto-encoding variational Bayes. Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR 2014). https://arxiv.org/abs/1312.6114
Lovato, J., Zimmerman, J., Smith, I., Dodds, P., & Karson, J. (2024). Foregrounding artist opinions: A survey study on transparency, ownership, and fairness in AI generative art. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.15497
Manovich, L. (2022). AI aesthetics. Strelka Press.
McCormack, J., Gifford, T., & Hutchings, P. (2019). Autonomy, authenticity, and creativity in generative art systems. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Creativity, 133-140.
Miller, A. I. (2019). The artist in the machine: The world of AI-powered creativity. MIT Press.
Mikalonytė, E. S., & Kneer, M. (2021). Can artificial intelligence make art? arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.07598
Moura, T. (2023). Artificial intelligence creates art? The Journal of Creative Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.600
Murray, M. D. (2024). Tools do not create: Human authorship in the use of generative artificial intelligence. Case Western Reserve Journal of Law, Technology & the Internet, 15(1), 76. https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jolti/vol15/iss1/3
Papi, Fatemeh, Dadour, Abolghasem. (1403). Investigating the role and application of artificial intelligence in the creation of modern works of art and how artistic approaches change in the digital era. Art Studies, 3(1), 31-63. [in Persian] 
Ramesh, A., Pavlov, M., Goh, G., Voss, C., Chen, M., & Mishkin, P. (2021). Zero-Shot Text-to-Image Generation. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2021). https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.12092
Rasmus, A., Berglund, M., & Honkela, T. (2015). Semi-supervised learning with deep generative models. Neural Networks, 58, 52-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neunet.2014.07.004
Rezk, S. M. M. (2023). The role of artificial intelligence in graphic design. Journal of Art, Design and Music, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.55554/2785 9649.1005 (jadm.eg.net)
Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (4th ed.). Pearson.
Smith, J., Liu, W., & Lee, Y. (2021). Interactive content generation using machine learning. Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2021). https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445511
Sobhan, A., Pasquier, P., & Aceves Sepulveda, G. (2023). Broken letters, broken narratives: Arabic script in DALL·E 3. arXiv.
Zhang, L., Wilson, K., & Amos, C. (2025). The rise of AI art: A look through digital artists’ eyes. First Monday, 30(4). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v30i4.13809