Generative AI in academic writing: Does information on authorship impact learners’ revision behavior?

The role of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in education has expanded significantly over recent years. AI-based text generators such as ChatGPT provide an accessible and effective tool for learners, particularly in academic writing. While revision is considered an essential part of both indi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Anna Radtke, Nikol Rummel
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2025-06-01
Series:Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666920X2400153X
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850223385205800960
author Anna Radtke
Nikol Rummel
author_facet Anna Radtke
Nikol Rummel
author_sort Anna Radtke
collection DOAJ
description The role of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in education has expanded significantly over recent years. AI-based text generators such as ChatGPT provide an accessible and effective tool for learners, particularly in academic writing. While revision is considered an essential part of both individual and collaborative writing, research on the revision of AI-generated texts remains limited. However, with the growing adoption of generative AI in education, learners’ ability to effectively revise AI-generated content is likely to become increasingly important in the future. The aim of this study was to investigate whether learners exhibit different revision behaviors when presented with different information about the author of a text (peer vs. AI). We further examined the impact of learners’ prior experiences, attitudes, and gender on text revision. Therefore, N = 303 learners revised two different texts: one labeled as peer-written and the other as AI-generated. The results revealed that while learners invested less time in revising a text labeled as AI-generated, information about the author did not affect the number of areas identified as requiring improvement or the number of revisions made. Moreover, learners who indicated greater prior exposure to media reports about AI-based text generators, a higher level of trust in AI, and a tendency toward ‘loafing’ in AI-assisted writing spent less time revising a text labeled as AI-generated. Conversely, learners with more experience in academic writing identified more areas for improvement and made more extensive revisions, regardless of the labeled authorship.
format Article
id doaj-art-a570d7ea62154174b7d21f6d6046272b
institution OA Journals
issn 2666-920X
language English
publishDate 2025-06-01
publisher Elsevier
record_format Article
series Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence
spelling doaj-art-a570d7ea62154174b7d21f6d6046272b2025-08-20T02:05:59ZengElsevierComputers and Education: Artificial Intelligence2666-920X2025-06-01810035010.1016/j.caeai.2024.100350Generative AI in academic writing: Does information on authorship impact learners’ revision behavior?Anna Radtke0Nikol Rummel1Center for Advanced Internet Studies (CAIS), Konrad-Zuse-Straße 2a, 44801 Bochum, Germany; Corresponding author. Konrad-Zuse-Straße 2a, 44801, Bochum, Germany.Center for Advanced Internet Studies (CAIS), Konrad-Zuse-Straße 2a, 44801 Bochum, Germany; Ruhr University Bochum (RUB), Universitätsstraße 150, 44801 Bochum, GermanyThe role of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in education has expanded significantly over recent years. AI-based text generators such as ChatGPT provide an accessible and effective tool for learners, particularly in academic writing. While revision is considered an essential part of both individual and collaborative writing, research on the revision of AI-generated texts remains limited. However, with the growing adoption of generative AI in education, learners’ ability to effectively revise AI-generated content is likely to become increasingly important in the future. The aim of this study was to investigate whether learners exhibit different revision behaviors when presented with different information about the author of a text (peer vs. AI). We further examined the impact of learners’ prior experiences, attitudes, and gender on text revision. Therefore, N = 303 learners revised two different texts: one labeled as peer-written and the other as AI-generated. The results revealed that while learners invested less time in revising a text labeled as AI-generated, information about the author did not affect the number of areas identified as requiring improvement or the number of revisions made. Moreover, learners who indicated greater prior exposure to media reports about AI-based text generators, a higher level of trust in AI, and a tendency toward ‘loafing’ in AI-assisted writing spent less time revising a text labeled as AI-generated. Conversely, learners with more experience in academic writing identified more areas for improvement and made more extensive revisions, regardless of the labeled authorship.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666920X2400153XAI-assisted writingText revisionGenerative AIAcademic writingCollaborative writing
spellingShingle Anna Radtke
Nikol Rummel
Generative AI in academic writing: Does information on authorship impact learners’ revision behavior?
Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence
AI-assisted writing
Text revision
Generative AI
Academic writing
Collaborative writing
title Generative AI in academic writing: Does information on authorship impact learners’ revision behavior?
title_full Generative AI in academic writing: Does information on authorship impact learners’ revision behavior?
title_fullStr Generative AI in academic writing: Does information on authorship impact learners’ revision behavior?
title_full_unstemmed Generative AI in academic writing: Does information on authorship impact learners’ revision behavior?
title_short Generative AI in academic writing: Does information on authorship impact learners’ revision behavior?
title_sort generative ai in academic writing does information on authorship impact learners revision behavior
topic AI-assisted writing
Text revision
Generative AI
Academic writing
Collaborative writing
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666920X2400153X
work_keys_str_mv AT annaradtke generativeaiinacademicwritingdoesinformationonauthorshipimpactlearnersrevisionbehavior
AT nikolrummel generativeaiinacademicwritingdoesinformationonauthorshipimpactlearnersrevisionbehavior