You could make the point that it’s no different than the textbook example you gave, but people don’t generally use textbooks like that, while out in the world people do use LLMs like that all the time.
I agree there are important differences in how textbooks and LLMs are used in real life. This study didn't explore that at all. It used a setup that essentially elided the difference between the two.
This is why I think it's a bad study. It didn't measure anything of the essential differences of how people use LLMs.
The number of people using LLMs must dwarf the number of people using textbooks for any reason.
What open book quizzes allow you to leave all answers blank with no penalty? An open book quiz is very different from the experimental setup tested here.
If you're saying they wouldn't suggest a book with considered-wrong answers in a real test, then they wouldn't suggest an LLM they know gives lots of wrong answers either.
As a famous example, you were incentivized to leave questions blank on the American SATs (until somewhat recently).
Feels like this differs wildly depending on who you consider "people" to be. The average person on the street? Definitely just parrots stuff they've read somewhere, not even a "textbook". A group of software developers used to parsing semi-true information? Probably they'd get it right, yeah.
Or a teacher they met in childhood who taught them everything they know, right or wrong.
They are the first to parrot what was spewed from llm and previous even what was found on 4chan.