When you see AI instantly generating a well-formatted, logically clear piece of code or document, do you instinctively choose to trust it? According to AIbase, the major model company Anthropic recently released a research report titled "AI Fluency Index." The study found a concerning phenomenon after analyzing nearly 10,000 anonymous Claude conversation samples: the more "polished" the AI-generated results appear, the lower users' willingness to verify facts becomes.
The report indicates that when Claude produces "artifacts" such as small applications, web code, or formatted documents, users' critical engagement significantly declines. Data shows that in these high-quality visual output scenarios, users' fact-checking behavior decreases by 3.7 percentage points, their questioning of the reasoning process drops by 3.1 percentage points, and their awareness of missing context decreases by 5.2 percentage points. This "perfect is correct" psychological illusion is becoming an invisible barrier to effectively using AI.
However, the study also revealed common traits among "high-performers." Data shows that about 85.7% of high-quality conversations went through repeated iterations and refinement. Users who were willing to ask multiple follow-up questions to guide the AI found logical flaws 5.6 times more often than average users and improved their ability to identify missing context by 4 times.
Currently, Anthropic advises users to maintain three core habits when facing AI outputs: treat the first response as a "draft" rather than a final version, remain skeptical of seemingly perfect outputs, and clearly establish collaborative rules at the beginning of the conversation (such as asking the AI to list its reasoning process). True AI competence is not only about writing instructions, but also about whether humans can maintain the last line of defense against polished outputs.
