Research Article

Using ChatGPT in academic writing is (not) a form of plagiarism: What does the literature say?

Adeeb M. Jarrah 1 , Yousef Wardat 2 * , Patricia Fidalgo 1
More Detail
1 Emirates College for Advanced Education, Abu Dhabi, UAE2 Higher Colleges of Technology, Al Ain, UAE* Corresponding Author
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), October 2023, e202346, https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/13572
Published Online: 11 August 2023, Published: 01 October 2023
OPEN ACCESS   7046 Views   5132 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This study aims to review the existing literature on using ChatGPT in academic writing and its implications regarding plagiarism. Various databases, including Scopus, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest, were searched using specific keywords related to ChatGPT in academia, academic research, higher education, academic publishing, and ethical challenges. The review provides an overview of studies investigating the use of ChatGPT in academic writing and its potential association with plagiarism. The results of this study contribute to our understanding of the use and misuse of ChatGPT in academic writing, considering the growing concern regarding plagiarism in higher education. The findings suggest that ChatGPT can be a valuable writing tool; however, it is crucial to follow responsible practices to uphold academic integrity and ensure ethical use. Properly citing and attributing ChatGPT’s contribution is essential in recognizing its role, preventing plagiarism, and upholding the principles of scholarly writing. By adhering to established citation guidelines, authors can maximize ChatGPT’s benefits while maintaining responsible usage.
Keywords: artificial Intelligence, ChatGPT, academic writing, academic integrity, plagiarism

CITATION (APA)

Jarrah, A. M., Wardat, Y., & Fidalgo, P. (2023). Using ChatGPT in academic writing is (not) a form of plagiarism: What does the literature say?. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202346. https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/13572

REFERENCES

  1. Alkaissi, H., & McFarlane, S. I. (2023). Artificial hallucinations in ChatGPT: Implications in scientific writing. Cureus, 15(2), e35179. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.35179
  2. Alneyadi, S., & Wardat, Y. (2023). ChatGPT: Revolutionizing student achievement in the electronic magnetism unit for eleventh-grade students in Emirates schools. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), ep448. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13417
  3. Alser, M., & Waisberg, E. (2023). Concerns with the usage of ChatGPT in academia and medicine: A viewpoint. American Journal of Medicine Open, 9, 100036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajmo.2023.100036
  4. Anderson, N., Belavy, D. L., Perle, S. M., Hendricks, S., Hespanhol, L., Verhagen, E., & Memon, A. R. (2023). AI did not write this manuscript, or did it? Can we trick the AI text detector into generated texts? The potential future of ChatGPT and AI in sports & exercise medicine manuscript generation. BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, 9(1), e001568. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2023-001568
  5. Andrews, S., Bare, L., Bentley, P., Goedegebuure, L., Pugsley, C., & Rance, B. (2016). Contingent academic employment in Australian universities. LH Martin Institute. http://hdl.voced.edu.au/10707/404396
  6. Bayne, S. (2018). Teacherbot: Interventions in automated teaching. Apertura, 10(2), 140-154. https://doi.org/10.32870/ap.v10n2.1342
  7. Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610-623). https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922
  8. Bom, H. S. H. (2023). Exploring the opportunities and challenges of ChatGPT in academic writing: A roundtable discussion. Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 57, 165-167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13139-023-00809-2
  9. Cao, Y., Li, S., Liu, Y., Yan, Z., Dai, Y., Yu, P. S., & Sun, L. (2023). A comprehensive survey of AI-generated content (AIGC): A history of generative AI from GAN to ChatGPT. arXiv, 2303, 04226. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.04226
  10. Carrera-Rivera, A., Ochoa, W., Larrinaga, F., & Lasa, G. (2022). How-to conduct a systematic literature review: A quick guide for computer science research. MethodsX, 9, 101895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2022.101895
  11. Chen, L., Chen, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access, 8, 75264-75278. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510.
  12. Chen, X., Wang, Y., Nakanishi, M., Gao, X., Jung, T.-P., & Gao, S. (2015). High-speed spelling with a noninvasive brain-computer interface. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(44), E6058-E6067. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1508080112
  13. Cotton, D. R., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
  14. David, E. (2023). Pausing AI might be a good idea, but companies won’t do it. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/openai-elon-musk-pause-development-letter-never-happen-2023-4
  15. De Lange, C. (2015). Welcome to the bionic dawn. New Scientist, 227(3032), 24-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0262-4079(15)30881-2
  16. ‌Dergaa, I., Chamari, K., Zmijewski, P., & Ben Saad, H. (2023). From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing. Biology of Sport, 40(2), 615-622. https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2023.125623
  17. Editorial. (2023). Why ChatGPT should not be used to write academic scientific manuscripts for publication. Annals of Family Medicine, 2958. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2982
  18. Frye, B. L. (2022). Should using an AI text generator to produce academic writing be plagiarism? Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal, 947.
  19. Gao, C. A., Howard, F. M., Markov, N. S., Dyer, E. C., Ramesh, S., Luo, Y., & Pearson, A. T. (2023). Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers. npj Digital Medicine, 6, 75. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-023-00819-6
  20. Gavilán, J. C. O., Díaz, D. Z., Huallpa, J. J., Cabala, J. L. B., Aguila, O. E. P., Puma, E. G. M., Vasquez-Pauca, M. J., Mansilla, E. B. R., Laura, P. A. S., & Hoces, W. B. (2022). Technological social responsibility in university professors. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 100(100), 104-118.
  21. ‌Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017). An introduction to systematic reviews. SAGE.
  22. Herbst-Debby, A., Kaplan, A., Endeweld, M., & Achouche, N. (2023). Adolescent employment, family income and parental divorce. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 84, 100772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2023.100772
  23. Holland, M. (2023). Responsible AI helps reduce ethical, legal risks. techtarget.com. https://www.techtarget.com/searchcio/news/366536672/Responsible-AI-helps-reduce-ethical-legal-risks
  24. Johnson, A. (2023). ChatGPT in schools: Here’s where it’s banned–And how it could potentially help students. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/ariannajohnson/2023/01/18/chatgpt-in-schools-heres-where-its-banned-and-how-it-could-potentially-help-students/?sh=443643686e2c
  25. Khalil, M., & Er, E. (2023). Will ChatGPT get you caught? Rethinking of plagiarism detection. ArXiv, 2302, 04335. https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/fnh48
  26. Kim, J. (2018). Are the professions (disciplines?) of educational developer and learning designer merging? Or not? Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/blogs/technology-and-learning/are-professions-disciplines-educational-eveloper
  27. Kübler, A., Holz, E. M., Sellers, E. W., & Vaughan, T. M. (2015). Toward independent home use of brain-computer interfaces: A decision algorithm for selection of potential end-users. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 96(3), S27-S32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2014.03.036
  28. Kumar, A. (2023). Analysis of ChatGPT tool to assess the potential of its utility for academic writing in biomedical domain. Biology, Engineering, Medicine and Science Reports, 9(1), 24-30. https://doi.org/10.5530/bems.9.1.5
  29. Macdonald, C., Adeloye, D., Sheikh, A., & Rudan, I. (2023). Can ChatGPT draft a research article? An example of population-level vaccine effectiveness analysis. Journal of Global Health, 13. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.13.01003
  30. Mansilla, E. B. R., Castillo-Acobo, R. Y., Puma, E. G. M., Maquera, Y. M., Gonzales, J. L. A., & Vasquez-Pauca, M. M. J. (2022). Stress in university teachers in the framework of the post-pandemic face-to-face. Journal of Namibian Studies, 33(S1), 71-85.
  31. McCarthy, J. (2007). From here to human-level AI. Artificial Intelligence, 171(18), 1174-1182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2007.10.009
  32. McKinsey & Company. (2023). What is generative AI? https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/mckinsey-explainers/what-is-generative-ai#/
  33. Mijwil, M. M., Hiran, K. K., Doshi, R., Dadhich, M., Al-Mistarehi, A.-H., & Bala, I. (2023). ChatGPT and the future of academic integrity in the artificial intelligence era: A new frontier. Al-Salam Journal for Engineering and Technology, 2(2), 116-127. https://doi.org/10.55145/ajest.2023.02.02.015
  34. Moher, D. (2019). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135
  35. Nath, S., Marie, A., Ellershaw, S., Korot, E., & Keane, P. A. (2022). New meaning for NLP: The trials and tribulations of natural language processing with GPT-3 in ophthalmology. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 106(7), 889-892. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2022-321141
  36. Nicholas, D., Watkinson, A., Jamali, H. R., Herman, E., Tenopir, C., Volentine, R., Allard, S., & Levine, K. (2015). Peer review: Still king in the digital age. Learned Publishing, 28(1), 15-21. https://doi.org/10.1087/20150104
  37. Niemimaa, M., & Zimmer, M. P. (2022). Are we discovering or making concepts? Performativity in concept defining. In Proceedings of the Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1-9).
  38. Okaibedi, D. (2023). ChatGPT and the rise of generative AI: Threat to academic integrity? Journal of Responsible Technology, 13, 100060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrt.2023.100060
  39. Perkins, M. (2023). Academic Integrity considerations of AI large language models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.02.07
  40. ‌Qasem, F. (2023). ChatGPT in scientific and academic research: future fears and reassurances. Library Hi Tech News, 40(3), 30-32. https://doi.org/10.1108/lhtn-03-2023-0043
  41. Rahman, M., Terano, H. J. R., Rahman, N., Salamzadeh, A., & Rahaman, S. (2023). ChatGPT and academic research: A review and recommendations based on practical examples. Journal of Education, Management and Development Studies, 3(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.52631/jemds.v3i1.175
  42. Salvagno, M., Taccone, F. S., & Gerli, A. G. (2023). Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing? Critical Care, 27(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-023-04380-2
  43. Tatzel, A., & Mael, D. (2023). “Write a paper on AI plagiarism”: An analysis on ChatGPT and its impact on academic dishonesty in higher education. https://www.lasell.edu/documents/Writing%20Program/2023%20Winners/TatzelA%20100%20Level%20Winnter%202023.pdf.
  44. Tomlinson, B., Torrance, A. W., & Black, R. W. (2023). ChatGPT and works scholarly: Best practices and legal pitfalls in writing with AI. arXiv, 2305, 03722. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2305.03722
  45. ‌Vijayakumar, S. (2023). 13 best AI essay writing tools to get A grades in 2023. Business 2 Community. https://www.business2community.com/ai/best-ai-essay-writer
  46. Wardat, Y., Tashtoush, M. A., AlAli, R., & Jarrah, A. M. (2023). ChatGPT: A revolutionary tool for teaching and learning mathematics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(7), em2286. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13272
  47. Wen, J., & Wang, W. (2023). The future of ChatGPT in academic research and publishing: A commentary for clinical and translational medicine. Clinical and Translational Medicine, 13(3), e1207. https://doi.org/10.1002/ctm2.1207
  48. Xu, Y., Liu, X., Cao, X., Huang, C., Liu, E., Qian, S., Liu, X., Wu, Y., Dong, F., Qiu, C.-W., Qiu, J., Hua, K., Su, W., Wu, J., Xu, H., Han, Y., Fu, C., Yin, Z., Liu, M., … Zhang, J. (2021). Artificial intelligence: A powerful paradigm for scientific research. The Innovation, 2, 100179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xinn.2021.100179
  49. Yan, D. (2023). Impact of ChatGPT on learners in a L2 writing practicum: An exploratory investigation. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11742-4
  50. Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education-where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 1, 16-39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
  51. Zheng, H., & Zhan, H. (2023). ChatGPT in scientific writing: A cautionary tale. The American Journal of Medicine, 136(8), 725-726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2023.02.011