erikgahner

Setting aside issues with the sample size and response rate, the current progress within the field shows how difficult it is to study the impact of AI on productivity.

Even if the survey was conducted one year later, I would not find it useful to make inferences about the use of AI tools in September 2026.

Got it, thanks!

I wouldn't call this a minor detail (i.e., nitpicking), and it is worth pointing out again and again when these studies get public attention.

We should encourage stronger research designs (including A/B tests) if we care about the impact of AI use on mental health outcomes. A study like this one cannot say anything about the effect at all (it is even possible that AI use will have a positive impact on mental health).

A lot of people might read this and infer that AI use causes depressive symptoms, but the study cannot say anything about causation at all. The study is also transparent about this fact: "Further work is needed to understand whether these associations are causal"

Great stuff! You can make minor adjustments to the R-script so you do not need to rely on {dplyr} and {tidyr}. For example, use merge() instead of left_join() and use the base pipe, |>, instead of the magrittr pipe, %>%.

Not OP but I guess Gladwell-style can be understood as writing that is presented as nonfictional but has more in common with fictional writing.

Interesting to see far-right terminology being used unironically at HN.