Experienced devs are slower with AI tools. Nobody wants to admit it.

May 25, 2026 · 10:17 AM UTC ·3 min read · 0 reactions · 0 comments · 31 views

#programming #ai #productivity #software development

TL;DR · WeSearch summary

A recent study found that experienced developers are actually slower when using AI coding tools, despite believing they are faster. The discrepancy between perceived and actual productivity is significant, with a 40 percentage point gap. This raises concerns about the reliance on AI tools in the industry, as many developers feel pressured to conform to the narrative that these tools enhance efficiency.

Key facts

▪Experienced open-source developers were found to be 19% slower when using AI coding assistants.
▪Despite this, they believed they were 20% faster, highlighting a significant disconnect between perception and reality.
▪The study suggests that AI tools may create an illusion of speed, as developers spend more time reviewing and correcting AI-generated code.

About this source

DEV.to (Top) files mainly under programming. We currently carry 4,924 of its stories.

All DEV.to (Top) coverage →

Original article

DEV.to (Top)

Read full at DEV.to (Top) →

Story provenance

Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record

inspect →

Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.

Record

Original publisher	DEV.to (Top)
Canonical URL	https://dev.to/adioof/experienced-devs-are-slower-with-ai-tools-nobody-wants-to-admit-it-3856
Publication time	Mon, 25 May 2026 10:17:24 +0000
Retrieval time	2026-05-25T10:37:36.650Z
Last seen	2026-05-25T10:37:36.650Z
Headline source	Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite)
Excerpt source	publisher body
Excerpt method	First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited.
Summary	WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer)
Summary source text	contentText
Citation coverage	Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL.
Cluster	SPDik9-ckF6D · 3 stories
Cluster logic	Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison.
Ranking reason	Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking.
Publisher visit	Yes — open original
Substitutes article?	No — link-out required for full text

Rights status (four layers)

Publisher-declared

No publisher-confirmed rights record for this source yet.

Machine-readable

No source-specific machine-readable restriction detected beyond the public feed.

WeSearch interpretation

WeSearch declared handling (basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed). This is WeSearch policy, not a legal grant on the publisher's behalf.

Unknown

Retrieval and training permissions are not asserted unless the publisher confirms them.

WeSearch handling by dimension

Indexing	May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)?	Allowed
Snippet	May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown?	Allowed
AI summary	May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article?	Limited
Retrieval / RAG	May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation?	Not asserted
Model training	May the content be used to train AI models?	Not asserted
Commercial reuse	May the content be reused commercially?	Not permitted

Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.

Open original publisher → Source rights JSON → Machine-readable provenance → Rights framework → WESEARCH-STORY-PROVENANCE-V1

Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand

try { if(localStorage) { let currentUser = localStorage.getItem('current_user'); if (currentUser) { currentUser = JSON.parse(currentUser); if (currentUser.id === 2760047) { document.getElementById('article-show-container').classList.add('current-user-is-article-author'); } } } } catch (e) { console.error(e); } Aditya Agarwal Posted on May 25 Experienced devs are slower with AI tools. Nobody wants to admit it. #webdev #programming #discuss #career A recent study discovered that experienced open-source developers were 19% slower while using AI coding assistants. However, those same developers indicated themselves to believe that they were 20% faster. Read it and weep: the disconnect between perception and reality is nearing 40 percentage points.

…

Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at DEV.to (Top).

Anonymous · no account needed

Discussion

0 comments