Inicio
todoELE
  • Inicio
  • Materiales
    • πŸ“‹ Actividades
    • πŸ“ Conjugación
    • πŸ“Š Corpus
    • πŸ“” Diccionarios
    • βœ… Evaluación
    • βš™οΈ Gramática
    • πŸ“— Manuales
    • ✍️ Ortografía
    • πŸ“… Programación
    • πŸ—£οΈ Pronunciación
    • πŸ“ Recursos
    • πŸ”€ Vocabulario
    • πŸ’» Herramientas digitales
  • Formación
    • πŸ“š Bibliografía
    • πŸ‘₯ Congresos
    • πŸŽ“ Cursos
    • 🏫 Centros
    • 🏒 Organizaciones
    • πŸ“° Revistas
    • 🌍 Atlas de ELE
  • Trabajo
    • πŸ’Ό Ofertas de trabajo
    • ℹ️ Trabajo - Recursos
  • En la red
    • 🌐 Sitios ELE
    • πŸ“° Agregador
    • πŸ“§ Formespa
  • IA
    • ✨ Nuevos contenidos
    • πŸ“š Bibliografía IA
    • 🧰 Herramientas IA
    • πŸ’¬ Prompts
    • πŸ§ͺ Experiencias IA
    • 🌐 Sitios web IA
    • πŸ“° Actualidad IA
  • Comunidad
    • πŸ“° Actualidad ELE
    • 😊 Anécdotas ELE
    • πŸ“ Blog
    • πŸ“ŒTablón de anuncios
  • Buscar

Ruta de navegación

  • Inicio
  • Bibliografia
  • Does ChatGPT write like a student? Engagement markers in argumentative essays

Sección IA: Inteligencia artificial Bibliografía

Does ChatGPT write like a student? Engagement markers in argumentative essays

Feng Jiang
Ken Hyland
2025
Written Communication
42-3
463-492
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.117…
artículo
estudio empírico
estudio de corpus
inteligencia artificial
escritura académica
expresión escrita
corpus
análisis contrastivo
educación superior
evaluación
análisis de producción de IA
chatGPT
IA y enseñanza-aprendizaje de lenguas

ChatGPT has created considerable anxiety among teachers concerned that students might turn to large language models (LLMs) to write their assignments. Many of these models are able to create grammatically accurate and coherent texts, thus potentially enabling cheating and undermining literacy and critical thinking skills. This study seeks to explore the extent LLMs can mimic human-produced texts by comparing essays by ChatGPT and student writers. By analyzing 145 essays from each group, we focus on the way writers relate to their readers with respect to the positions they advance in their texts by examining the frequency and types of engagement markers. The findings reveal that student essays are significantly richer in the quantity and variety of engagement features, producing a more interactive and persuasive discourse. The ChatGPT-generated essays exhibited fewer engagement markers, particularly questions and personal asides, indicating its limitations in building interactional arguments. We attribute the patterns in ChatGPT’s output to the language data used to train the model and its underlying statistical algorithms. The study suggests a number of pedagogical implications for incorporating ChatGPT in writing instruction.

Manuscrito aceptado en abierto en el repositorio de la University of East Anglia.
  • Inicie sesión para enviar comentarios

Enviar publicación

Contenidos relacionados

  • Metadiscursive nouns in academic argument: ChatGPT vs student practices
  • Taking a stance: AI generated versus student written argumentative essays
  • Addressing the use of generative AI in academic writing
  • Style, sentiment, and quality of undergraduate writing in the AI era: A cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of 4,820 authentic empirical reports
  • AI-assisted writing and the impact of ChatGPT on Greek-speaking students with and without learning disabilities. Outcomes from a repeated measures design
  • Do teachers spot AI? Evaluating the detectability of AI-generated texts among student essays
Sobre Todoele Índice Publica Contacto: [email protected]
Política de privacidad Créditos