I'm not so sure. I think it's fair to say that only people who can output good art / code are qualified to evaluate the output of ai.
It's like how product people / C levels have absolutely no understanding of what makes for good code or a good engineering shop (aside from perceived costs.)
"Experts are biased when evaluating non-expert output" is what I would expect and think is probably the correct thing to be
I was thinking more in line “people whose jobs are threatened by technology are biased when evaluating that technology”. Note that I don’t make quality judgement about quality of LLM output.