Unraveling the Impact: An Empirical Investigation of ChatGPT’s Exclusion from Stack Overflow

Online platforms are struggling to decide whether and how to restrict generative AI. This study examines Stack Overflow’s ban on ChatGPT-generated content and compares user behavior with a similar programming forum on Reddit. The findings reveal an important tradeoff: After the restriction, Stack Overflow answers became longer, more positive, more linguistically complex, and received more net upvotes, suggesting that human contributors responded by signaling greater expertise and that peers perceived the answers as higher quality. However, the policy also reduced overall participation, including fewer questions, fewer answers, and fewer first-time contributors. Additional evidence from Italy’s temporary ChatGPT ban and a scenario-based experiment confirms that contributors increase effort and knowledge signaling when AI-generated content is restricted. For platform managers and policymakers, the implication is clear: Banning AI-generated content can help preserve perceived content quality, but it may also discourage participation. Rather than adopting blanket bans, platforms may benefit from policies that combine transparency, peer oversight, and selective AI-use rules to balance quality, trust, and community engagement.

• 저널Information Systems Research
• 토픽Expert finding and Q&A systems · Information Systems
• DOI10.1287/isre.2024.1235
• 저자Sameer Borwankar, Warut Khern-am-nuai, Anastasiya Pocheptsova Ghosh, Karthik Kannan