More human than human? Differences in lexis and collocation within academic essays produced by ChatGPT-3.5 and human L2 writers

Abstract

Abstract ChatGPT and similar generative AI models are increasingly being integrated into educational practice, including second language (L2) writing. However, AI-generated writing may significantly differ from that of developing L2 writers, raising potential issues over academic integrity. With AI detectors still underused in many contexts due to accuracy concerns, it is essential to determine if and how AI-generated texts are similar or different to those of L2 writers. This study compares lexical and collocation choices between essays on the same topic generated by ChatGPT (version 3.5) and human L2 writers using corpus analytic techniques. R statistical software was used for analysis and comparison. Results suggest that when tasked with producing academic essays under the same topic, ChatGPT-3.5 excels in generating texts with formal and complex vocabulary suited for academic and technical themes, while human L2 writers tend to focus on personal and social issues, using more varied and context-rich vocabulary. Accordingly, educators seeking to detect AI use should recognise the distinct linguistic and cultural experiences L2 writers bring to their writing, while students using AI need to understand the nature of the machine-like clarity and directness of expression as produced by ChatGPT as compared with their own typical production.

Ähnliche Arbeiten