Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study conducted a randomized crossover field experiment with 121 employees to investigate the impact of AI-assisted email writing on recipient engagement across three conditions: unaided writing, playful tone rewriting, and professional tone rewriting. The results revealed that playful editing significantly increased emotional positivity in emails, while professional editing decreased it; however, neither tone directly influenced open rates or reply rates. Instead, the emotional positivity generated by the sender was found to be a strong predictor of engagement metrics, indicating that the tone of AI-assisted communication indirectly affects workplace interactions through sender emotions.
Playful AI-generated emails boost emotional positivity, but surprisingly, they don't directly increase engagement metrics like open or reply rates.
Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly reshaping workplace communication, yet whether AI-assisted writing changes how recipients actually behave, and through what channel, remains unknown. Here, in a randomized crossover field experiment, 121 employees across six companies sent work emails under three conditions over three weeks: unaided writing, GPT-5 rewriting in a playful tone, and GPT-5 rewriting in a professional tone. Across 16,880 emails, playful editing increased emotional positivity (B=+0.068, p<0.001), and professional editing decreased it (B=-0.041, p<0.001), yet neither condition directly altered open rates, reply rates, or response times. Instead, within-sender positivity strongly predicted both opening (OR=2.05) and replying (OR=3.32, p<0.001), a significant indirect pathway through which AI editing shaped behavior, in the absence of any direct effect. These findings suggest that AI-assisted communication shapes workplace engagement not through its use, but through the emotional tone of the language it produces.