AI Ethics Learning Toolkit
Can we trust AI?
“Even if they can be tuned to be right more of the time, they will still have failure modes — and likely the failures will be in the cases where it’s harder for a person reading the text to notice, because they are more obscure.”
– Dr. Emily Bender, linguistics scholar, on AI’s hallucination problem
The rapid spread of AI-generated content poses a significant threat to public trust and the overall quality of information sources, with potentially serious real-world consequences across various fields such as medicine, government, law, and education. A major issue is AI hallucination–an instance where an AI model generates misleading, inaccurate, or entirely fabricated content, often without a clear basis in its training data. While some of these errors are easy to spot, others are subtle and difficult to detect, making them potentially dangerous. Even when AI generated information is cited, a recent study found that leading AI chatbots incorrectly cite their sources 60% of the time. Another related concern is AI slop—a flood of low-quality, often misleading, AI-generated content overwhelming the internet and social media. As AI continues to shape the way information is produced and consumed, students need to understand the nuances of these issues and learn how and when to fact check the information they get from AI.
Learning Activities
🗣️ Conversation Starters A Few Questions to Get the Discussion Going
- Have you noticed an AI making a mistake or giving a strange answer? How did you figure out it was wrong? Were there any clues that made you suspicious?
- Can you think of situations where an AI mistake, or AI slop, could cause real-world problems? Think about examples both in school and in everyday life.
- Who do you think should be responsible for false information generated by AI? The person using the AI, the company that made it, or someone else? Why do you think that?
- Look at the “Is it Safe to Use ChatGPT for Your Task?” flowchart. What are some scenarios where accurate output doesn’t matter? How does the flowchart impact your thinking about your use of AI?
- Scholars argue about whether to call erroneous AI outputs hallucinations, because the term reinforces the idea that AI is human. Other terms people prefer include: bullshit, mirage, and machine error, to name a few. What label do you think we should apply to false information generated by AI? Why?
💡 Active Learning with AI Fun Ways to Explore AI’s Strengths and Limitations
- Students use AI to generate a definition on a core topic/concept covered in class and compare the quality and accuracy of the AI’s output to an established text/reading/theory from class
- Students prompt AI to generate a bibliography on their topic using a GenAI tool and then are tasked with finding the items – flagging any that are hallucinated citations
- Students use AI to generate quotes from famous people, authors/scholars featured in the course. Does AI ever fabricate these quotes? If so, how easy is it to detect these errors?
- No AI Alternative: AI, or real? Games where students are presented with AI and human-generated info (text, image, video) and are asked to choose
🎓 Disciplinary Extensions Ideas for Exploring AI’s Impact in Specific Fields
- Social Sciences: Case study on the impact of AI slop in writing/publications in specific fields
- Psychology: What role do cognitive biases play in how people select and prioritize information?
- Arts & Humanities: Discuss the pros/cons of AI mimicry of creative works
- Computer Science/Engineering: Deeper dive into the technical underpinnings of AI hallucination
- Literature/Creative Writing: Ask a chatbot to generate a story or poem in the style of a well known writer
Resources
- Knibbs, K. (2024, Oct. 28). AI slop is flooding Medium. Wired. [Magazine article] 🔐🧾
- Rozear, H. and S. Park. (2023, March 9). ChatGPT and fake citations. Duke University Libraries Blogs. [Blog post] 🌐
- Wallace-Wells, D. (2024, July 24). Opinion | How long will A.I.’s ‘slop’ era last? The New York Times. [News Article; Editorial] 🔐📰
- Kircher, M. M. (2025, March 27). People love Studio Ghibli. But should they be able to recreate it? The New York Times. [News Article] 🔐📰
- Blum, D., & Astor, M. (2025, May 29). White House health report included fake citations. The New York Times. [News Article] 🔐📰
- LastWeekTonight. (2025, June 23). AI slop: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO). [Video – 29 min.] ▶️
- When AI gets it wrong, who’s on the hook? – Tech News Briefing – WSJ Podcasts. (2023, April 4). WSJ. 21 min. [Podcast] 🎧
- IBM. (2023, April 20). Why Large Language Models Hallucinate[Video – 9 min.]▶️
Scholarly
- Emsley, R. (2023). ChatGPT: These are not hallucinations – they’re fabrications and falsifications. Schizophrenia, 9(1), 52, s41537-023-00379–4. [Editorial in Journal; 7-min Video] 📄
- Goddard, J. (2023). Hallucinations in ChatGPT: A cautionary tale for biomedical researchers. The American Journal of Medicine. [Editorial in Journal] 📄
- Mills, A., & Angell, N. (2025). Are we tripping? The mirage of AI hallucinations (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. 5127162). Social Science Research Network. [Article] 📄
- Charloten, D. (2025). AI hallucination cases. A database compiling fake citations in court filings (160 to date). [Database] 🌐
- Banerjee, S., Agarwal, A., & Singla, S. (2024). LLMs will always hallucinate, and we need to live with this (No. arXiv:2409.05746). arXiv. [Preprint] 📄
Recommendations
- Related topics → Mis/Disinformation; Critical Thinking; Data Bias
- AI Pedagogy Project (Harvard) Assignments → Filter by theme or subject
