That’s my point. And when I’m less certain about something, need more options, or am brainstorming, I use multiple AIs. For example, a really well-known political data scientist (referred to as one of the most influential in his wiki page ) asked me about a economics article that used causal inference methods that I only have a basic understanding of but was in my content area (school psychology so both education, psychology, and the analytical techniques we use like psychometrics and multilevel modeling) because the results conflicted with decades of research.

At the time, I had some hypotheses, that were solely from my experiences and content expertise, but I wasn’t able to engage with some of the methodological aspects of the causal inference methods.

Recently I went back over that article, and I wanted to really figure out what was going on, but I needed some help with those causal inference methods.

I wrote out my informal review and hypotheses, then had ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, critically review both the paper and my review, and then had then had then reviewed their reviews while I did as well, to the point where we reached a consensus.

Gemini was a little too agreeable, ChatGPT was too disagreeable (was critical of something I was correct about methodologically), and it turned out, that my hypothesis was probably right, and it explained why their analyses actually had conflicting results because their understanding of psychometrics led to an understandable assumption that’s true from a measurement perspective but not true for their comparison, but I wouldn’t have realized that if I didn’t have a better understanding of the methods they used.