OpenAI, an artificial intelligence research and development company, released the latest version of their generative text chatbot program, ChatGPT, near the end of 2022. The program provides responses based on prompts from users. Since its release universities, research institutions, publishers and other educators worry that ChatGPT and similar products will radically change the current education system. Some institutions have taken action to limit or ban the use of AI generated text. Others argue that ChatGPT and similar products may be the perfect opportunity to reimagine education and scholarly publishing. There is a lot to learn about AI and its impact on research and publishing. This article aims to serve as an introduction to this rapidly evolving technology.
In a Nature article, Chris Stokel-Walker described ChatGPT as “a large language model (LLM), which generates convincing sentences by mimicking the statistical patterns of language in a huge database of text collated from the Internet.” (Stokel-Walker, 2023, para. 3) OpenAI’s website says “The dialogue format makes it possible for ChatGPT to answer followup questions, admit its mistakes, challenge incorrect premises, and reject inappropriate requests.” (OpenAI, n.d., para. 1) ChatGPT may be used to answer simple and complex questions and may provide long-form responses based on the prompt. In recent months, students and researchers have used the chatbot to perform simple research tasks or develop and draft manuscripts. By automating certain tasks, ChatGPT and other AI technologies may provide people with the opportunity to focus on other aspects of the research or learning process.
There are benefits and limitations to AI technology and many people agree that guidelines must be in place before ChatGPT and similar models are fully integrated into the classroom or laboratory.
Van Dis et al. notes that “Conversational AI is likely to revolutionize research practices and publishing, creating both opportunities and concerns. It might accelerate the innovation process, shorten time-to-publication, and by helping people to write fluently, make science more equitable and increase the diversity of scientific perspectives.” (van Dis et. al., 2023, para. 4) Researchers who have limited or no English language proficiency would benefit from using ChatGPT to develop their manuscript for publication. The current version of ChatGPT is free to use making it accessible to anyone with internet access and a computer. This may make scholarly publishing more equitable, though there is a version of the program that is only available with a monthly subscription fee. If future AI technologies require fees, this will create additional access and equity issues.
While ChatGPT can produce long-form, seemingly thoughtful responses there are concerns about its ability to accurately cite information. OpenAI states that “ChatGPT sometimes writes plausible-sounding but incorrect or nonsensical answers.” (OpenAI, n.d., para. 7) There is a potential for AI generated text to spread misleading information. Scholars who have tested ChatGPT also note that the AI will create references that do not exist. Researchers must fact-check the sources pulled by the AI to ensure that their work adheres to current integrity standards. There are also concerns about ChatGPT’s relationship to properly citing original sources. “And because this technology typically reproduces text without reliably citing the original sources or authors, researchers using it are at risk of not giving credit to earlier work, unwittingly plagiarizing a multitude of unknown texts and perhaps even giving away their own ideas.” (van Dis et al, 2023, para. 10)
Students and researchers interested in using AI generated text should be aware of current policies and restrictions. Many academic journals, universities and colleges have updated their policies to either limit the use or institute a complete ban of AI in research. Other institutions are actively discussing their plans for this new technology and may implement new policies in the future. At the time of writing, GWU has not shared policies to address AI usage in the classroom. If you’re interested in using AI generated text in your research papers or projects, be sure to closely read submission guidelines or university policies.
ChatGPT and other AI text generators are having profound impacts and as the technology continues to improve, it will become increasingly difficult distinguishing work written without the aid of an AI and work co-authored with an AI. The long term impacts of AI in the classroom have yet to be fully understood. Many institutions are moving to address this new technology. As we continue to learn about ChatGPT’s benefits and limitations, it is important to remain aware of your institution’s policies on using AI in research. To learn more about ChatGPT, please read any of the sources listed below! Himmelfarb Library will continue to discuss AI technology and its impact on research as more information is made available.
Additional Reading:
- Carpenter, T.A. (2023). Thoughts on AI’s Impact on Scholarly Communications? An Interview with ChatGPT. The Scholarly Kitchen.
- Huang, K. (2023). Alarmed by A.I. Chatbots, Universities Start Revamping How They Teach. New York Times (Online).
- Kendrick, C. (2023). Guest Post–The Efficacy of ChatGPT: Is It Time for the Librarians to Go Home?. The Scholarly Kitchen.
- Marche, S. (2022). The College Essay is Dead. The Atlantic.
- OpenAI. (n.d.). ChatGPT: Optimizing Language Models for Dialogue. https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/
- Sample, I. (2023). Science journals ban listing of ChatGPT as co-author on papers. The Guardian.
- Stokel-Walker, C. (2023). ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove. Nature (London), 613(7945), 620–621. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00107-z
- Stokel-Walker, C. & Van Noorden, R. (2023). What ChatGPT and generative AI means for science. Nature (London), 614(7947), 214-216. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00340-6
- Thorp, H.H. (2023). ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science(American Association for the Advancement of Science), 379(6630), 313. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg7879
- van Dis, E. A. M., Bollen, J., Zuidema, W., van Rooij, R., & Bockting, C. L. (2023). ChatGPT: five priorities for research. Nature, 614(7947), 224–226. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00288-7
- Watkins, R. (2022, December 18). Update Your Course Syllabus for chatGPT. Medium. https://medium.com/@rwatkins_7167/updating-your-course-syllabus-for-chatgpt-965f4b57b003
Work Cited:
- Huang, K. (2023). Alarmed by A.I. Chatbots, Universities Start Revamping How They Teach. New York Times (Online).
- OpenAI. (n.d.). ChatGPT: Optimizing Language Models for Dialogue. https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/
- Stokel-Walker, C. (2023). ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove. Nature (London), 613(7945), 620–621. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00107-z
- van Dis, E. A. M., Bollen, J., Zuidema, W., van Rooij, R., & Bockting, C. L. (2023). ChatGPT: five priorities for research. Nature, 614(7947), 224–226. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00288-7
