Chat GPT looks impressive and can be a powerful tool for generating text, but it is not a research tool.

ChatGPT doesn't understand the text it processes. Instead, it’s simply giving an amalgamated response trained on almost the entire internet. In other words, it’s analogous to clicking the suggested next word on your cellphone’s keyboard, if that cellphone was shared by every website online.

As a result, it may produce outputs that are inappropriate or nonsensical. It’s output can be misleading or simply wrong.

MotivAI returns rapid answers in natural language using aspects of OpenAI’s technology. But the underlying data used is our research data.

Our consumer data has been collected, processed, mapped to cultural meanings, and analyzed through a process developed by our team of PhD Anthropologists since 2015.

And it is updated every month.

Our data is limited to actual consumer conversations on deep engagement platforms, while ChatGPT’s data includes blogs, scientific articles, and everything else on the internet.

MotivAI isn’t simply trying to give you the most likely answer per the internet.

Instead, it conducts an anthropological analysis.

It uses the anthropological methodology we’ve developed since 2015, and its output is designed to surface anthropologically interesting information by analyzing patterns in consumer conversations and interpreting those patterns.

You can read more about how MotivAI works here.

Beyond the findings, MotivAI also presents useful metrics so you know whether or not you should action on its findings, including maturity and demographic profiles.

Asking ChatGPT about plastic packaging (six points for ease of comparison) surfaces some useful insight: plastic’s wastefulness, environmental impact, and the desire for recyclability.

But it also highlights many industry talking points, likely from plastic industry blogs: convenience, plastic’s superior safety, and it’s aesthetic appeal.

Now, let’s look at our data from MotivAI, which focuses on what consumers are saying about plastic packaging:

Notice how the industry talking points (superior aesthetics, convenience, superior safety) aren’t found in our consumer-centric data.

Instead, consumers conversations are challenging the necessity of plastic packaging by questioning these very industry narratives.

We also see that, while ChatGPT highlighted recyclability, it missed the fact that consumers actually see recyclable packaging as distinct from plastic. In other words, they don’t see plastic as recyclable.

Finally, ChatGPT missed the entire conversation on biodegradability, which consumers are focusing on as the solution to plastic waste.

ChatGPT missed these things because its reply reflects the totality of the internet, of which consumer conversations are only a small part.