
How to read this finding
The writing results concern specific assigned tasks and rated outputs. The funding figure removes generative AI from an aggregate comparison. Neither is a measured economy-wide productivity or investment effect.
A study of mid-level professional writing found that ChatGPT users completed tasks in 40% less time and produced output rated 18% better than a control group. These were task-level findings.

The writing results concern specific assigned tasks and rated outputs. The funding figure removes generative AI from an aggregate comparison. Neither is a measured economy-wide productivity or investment effect.
Evidence you can use
Historical snapshot: October 2023. Dates and populations are specified per row.
| Measure | Reported value | Definition and source |
|---|---|---|
| Writing task completion time | 40% less time | ChatGPT-assisted participants versus the control group in the professional-writing study.2023 report, slide 91 (PDF page 91) |
| Writing output quality | 18% better | Rated output quality in the same study; not a company-wide productivity measure.2023 report, slide 91 (PDF page 91) |
| AI investment excluding generative AI | 40% decline | Report’s counterfactual comparison for H1 2023 against H1 2022; not the actual overall AI funding change.2023 report, slide 109 (PDF page 109) |
The writing results concern specific assigned tasks and rated outputs. The funding figure removes generative AI from an aggregate comparison. Neither is a measured economy-wide productivity or investment effect.
Historical snapshot published October 12, 2023. This web edition was prepared on October 10, 2026 from the online deck and original launch posts. Findings and forecasts retain their original time frame.
Benaich, Nathan. “What productivity gains did the 2023 report find?.” State of AI Report 2023. Historical report snapshot; web edition prepared 2026-10-10.