AI research must not replace research

February 3, 2024

Duke University’s Interdisciplinary Behavioral Research Center for Human Engagement

The COVID-19 pandemic has reoriented the research landscape towards online research. However, the introduction of AI technologies that mimic human responses has also led to new complexities that can undermine the authenticity of data obtained through online surveys, according to Patty Van Cappellen, director of Duke University’s Interdisciplinary Behavioral Research Center (https://ibrc.duke.edu/).

Appropriate payment

The expert advocates both online research and the value of face-to-face research. AI tools such as ChatGPT can be used to answer surveys and promptly provide all the desired answers. It is even possible for the AI to watch videos and provide answers about the content or even opinions. There are probably a number of reasons for this approach.

According to the researcher, one reason could be that people who are paid a very low six dollars (around 5.50 euros) for their work save themselves time and effort. Another reason could be limited resources. However, according to Van Cappellen, this raises an important question: how can we learn about people’s opinions, feelings or behavior if the available data actually comes from ChatGPT?

Re-evaluating AI research

According to the expert, the phenomenon is a siren call to re-evaluate the quality and authenticity of online research data. She asks whether this could be a signal for a renaissance of research conducted by the researchers themselves. The controlled environment of this type of research has always been seen as its seal of approval. The value, according to Van Cappellen, goes far beyond this control and accuracy.
The benefits of this approach also include the fact that nothing can replace direct human interaction. This is also true for students and budding researchers, who can learn so much more about human behavior. Nevertheless, online research has its advantages, especially when it comes to accessing remote locations or conducting cross-cultural studies.

However, Van Cappellen emphasizes that the procedures for protecting against manipulation by means of an AI must be improved and, at the same time, access and scope for personally conducted research projects must also be facilitated.

Related Articles

Commentary: BERLIN – Known risks, familiar words, familiar failures

The power outage in Berlin since 3 January 2026 is extraordinary in its scale, but remarkably familiar in its causes and political consequences. Five damaged high-voltage cables, tens of thousands of households without electricity and heating, restrictions on mobile...

Commentary: Hesse’s clear stance against left-wing extremism

In his statement, Hesse's Interior Minister Roman Poseck paints a deliberately clear picture of left-wing extremism as a threat to security. The core of his position is clear: left-wing extremism is not understood as a marginal phenomenon or merely a side issue of...

Positive safety record at Bavaria’s Christmas markets

Successful protection concepts combining presence, prevention and cooperation At the end of the 2025 Christmas market season, the Bavarian State Ministry of the Interior reports a thoroughly positive safety record. Home Secretary Joachim Herrmann spoke of...

Share This