Valuing AI Art: An Experimental Study (2)

Last registered on June 18, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Valuing AI Art: An Experimental Study (2)
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0018880
Initial registration date
June 07, 2026

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
June 18, 2026, 9:07 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Country
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Region

Primary Investigator

Name
Tom Lane
Affiliation
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Timo Heinrich
PI Affiliation
Hamburg University of Technology
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Harry Pickard
PI Affiliation
Newcastle University
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Matt Walker
PI Affiliation
Newcastle University
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2026-06-08
End date
2026-07-17
Keywords
Behavior
Additional Keywords
AI
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial is based on or builds upon one or more prior RCTs.
Abstract
This work extends trial AEARCTR-0014469. A similar experiment to the original will be run using a general population online sample. A further experiment will be run using mugs with poetry, rather than artworks.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Heinrich, Timo et al. 2026. "Valuing AI Art: An Experimental Study (2)." AEA RCT Registry. June 18. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.18880-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Artworks and mugs featuring poetry will be auctioned. The treatment is whether subjects are informed that the artwork or poem on the mug is human-made or AI-made.

See attached pre-analysis plan for full details.
Intervention (Hidden)
Intervention Start Date
2026-06-08
Intervention End Date
2026-07-17

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
bids (willingness to pay)
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Subjects participate in a series of 10 2nd price Vickrey auctions (Vickrey, 1961). Subjects are informed that they will be matched (ex post) into groups of 4 bidders for determining auction outcomes. These groups remain fixed across rounds. Each subject is endowed with an income of £12 that they can bid. In each round, one item – either a visual artwork or a haiku mug – from the relevant final sample (human-created or AI-generated depending on the treatment) is auctioned within each group. We will vary between subjects whether they participate in auctions of a visual artwork or a haiku mug. An image of the artwork or mug is displayed on the respective Qualtrics screen. The order of lots is randomized across participants. Subjects submit their bids for each lot using a sealed-bid format and no feedback is provided on auction outcomes within the group until after the session. Thus, the subject is the independent level of observation for bids/willingness to pay (which are theoretically equivalent in the Vickrey auction). After all of the auction rounds are completed, one round is selected at random separately for each group. The subject who submitted the highest bid in the group in the selected round’s auction wins the item and second-highest bid in the group is subtracted from the highest bidder’s income.

The rules of the auction are explained to subjects at the beginning, together with the strategic reasoning for why they should bid the highest amount of money that each item is worth to them. Providing this information is appropriate for experiments (such as this one) in which the goal is to elicit homegrown values under the assumption that subjects know the dominant strategy property of the auction is to bid their value (see Harrison et al., 2004, for a discussion). To further facilitate learning of the dominant strategy, each subject will individually undertake a hypothetical training exercise in which they will receive feedback if they fail to select the dominant strategy.

At the end, participants participate in a post-experimental survey, including questions about demographics, and subjects’ views towards and experiences with AI and art (more information in Section VIII).

A multi-step pre-testing process is conducted to select the items used in the experiment.

Further details are provided in the attached pre-analysis plan document.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Computerised randomisation of individual to treatment
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
1068 individuals
Sample size: planned number of observations
1068 individuals
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
252 participants per treatment
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Newcastle University Ethics Committee
IRB Approval Date
2026-03-11
IRB Approval Number
50559/2023
Analysis Plan

Analysis Plan Documents

AI_ART_PAP_REV_2026-June7 FINAL VERSION.pdf

MD5: a9ade180c624610bc2fc8b68bf1aade5

SHA1: 5a6bbe0f8719da749a88e7af5b9ac657a64ee4df

Uploaded At: June 07, 2026

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials