ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI, is a cutting-edge language model that has the potential to revolutionize various fields, including the scientific community. As a pre-trained AI model, ChatGPT has been trained on a vast corpus of text data and can generate human-like responses to questions and prompts. This technology has numerous applications in the scientific community, from aiding in the writing process to assisting with data analysis and visualization.
This leads me to the question whether or not it is ethical to use ChatGPT in science writing. What is your opinion on that: Should ChatGPT be used to support writing scientific papers? If you agree, how can we use it to support our work? How shouldn't it be used? What are the limitations? And should ChatGPT be credited or acknowledged within the paper?
If you are curious, here is the answer of ChatGPT to the questions:
"As a language model developed by OpenAI, I do not have personal opinions. However, I can provide some insights on the matter.
The use of ChatGPT to support writing scientific papers is a matter of debate among researchers and academic communities. On one hand, ChatGPT can assist in generating ideas, outlining the structure of a paper, and providing suggestions for language usage. On the other hand, relying solely on AI-generated content may compromise the originality and authenticity of the paper.
It is important to note that ChatGPT's knowledge is limited to the text data it was trained on and may not be up-to-date with recent developments in the field. Additionally, ChatGPT may not understand the context and nuances of a specific field, which could lead to inaccuracies.
As for referencing or acknowledging ChatGPT in a scientific paper, it ultimately depends on the policies and guidelines of the particular publication and academic community. If the authors have used ChatGPT to generate substantial portions of the paper, it is ethical to acknowledge its usage. However, if ChatGPT was used as a mere aid or tool for inspiration, acknowledging its usage may not be necessary.
In conclusion, while ChatGPT can provide valuable support in writing scientific papers, it should not be relied upon as the sole source of information and creativity. The limitations and ethical considerations should also be kept in mind when deciding whether to reference or acknowledge ChatGPT in a paper."
To spark ideas and expose some possible routes for further research would be ok; that's as far as you can profitably take it.
My opinion is that ChatGPT can be a useful tool to support scientific writing but should be used with caution. ChatGPT can be used to help generate ideas, structure sentences and paragraphs, and provide insights that may not be immediately obvious. However, it should not be used as a substitute for the actual thought process and creativity of the writer. The writer should always be credited for their own ideas and contributions.
ChatGPT should also not be used to produce content that is plagiarized or fraudulent. Additionally, its use should be limited to areas where it can provide a genuine benefit. For example, it could be used to aid in proofreading and editing, but it should not be used to completely rewrite a paper from scratch.
In terms of crediting ChatGPT, it is not necessary to explicitly credit the model in the paper itself. However, it may be appropriate to mention it in the acknowledgements section of the paper, as ChatGPT was used to help generate and refine the content.
ChatGPT can be a useful tool to support scientific writing. It can provide researchers with alternative phrasing, suggest synonyms, and even generate complete sentences or paragraphs. However, the use of ChatGPT in scientific writing raises ethical concerns, particularly regarding plagiarism and the potential distortion of scientific information.
In my opinion, ChatGPT should only be used as a tool to support and complement the work of human authors. Researchers should not rely solely on AI-generated text to write scientific papers, as this can lead to plagiarism and misrepresentation of scientific findings.
One way to use ChatGPT ethically is to use it to generate ideas, keywords, or phrases that can be incorporated into original writing. Researchers can also use ChatGPT to check grammar, spelling, and syntax errors.
However, there are limitations to the use of ChatGPT in scientific writing. The model's understanding of technical jargon and scientific concepts is limited, and it may not always generate appropriate and accurate language for scientific writing.
When using ChatGPT to support scientific writing, it is important to acknowledge and credit the tool appropriately. Researchers should clearly state that AI was used to generate certain sections of the paper and provide a reference to the ChatGPT tool that was used.
In summary, ChatGPT can be a useful tool to support scientific writing, but it should be used ethically and in combination with human authors' expertise. Researchers should be cautious of the limitations of the tool and appropriately credit its contribution to the paper.
Dear Dr Sylvia
You raise some very difficult questions. And the reply you “got” was very eerie.
Your original question was “should…?” If it was simply a question like that, then clearly it is no to me. But it’s a much more complex question.
How will schools and universities (or anyone) ever know if you wrote it or Chat GPT?
Taking inspiration from what ChatGPT responds is definitely ethical in my opinion, but of course you have to approach it critically and verify the information. On the other hand, I have a negative view of its future role in, for example, dissertations. As an academic, I am sure that students will reach for this tool, and supervisors will have a rather difficult job to detect such abuse.
Jakub Semrau perhaps you may have to mention the use of AI, but rather not as a co-author, since it cannot be assigned copyright. Perhaps, for example, in the bibliography? Possibly a mention of it in the introduction? Although I wrote about drawing inspiration and suggesting ideas for further exploration, which I don't need to mention in the text.
In my opinion, Writesonic is much better than ChatGPT. Of course, I am not saying that it should be used. I'm only saying that a lot more articles will start to be written in cooperation with AI. There will come a time that we will list AI as a co-author....
Szymon Rubisz, exactly, the use of AI should be mentioned. The information in the introduction is also a good idea.
I only wonder how many authors will use AI to write entire articles and not even mention the use of AI.
I think it can be a useful tool with limitations such as others before it. I use other language tools to improve my writing - especially as a non-native speaker - do I cite grammerly or DeepL - no I do not.
However, it clearly depends on the extent: For example, a colleague recently used the tool Chat GPT for generating items - however, this needs a skilled process to create a usefull output of good quality - it is not be done by one simple order or question. Thus, the tool is only as good as the user who knows to use it well (which is why I am currently not so concerned for students using it in the academic sphere - also because citations are still not done (well) by the tool).
Nevertheless, I would probably cite Chat GPT and the process I used when I generated items/measurement instruments such as other tools I would use for methods (e.g., analyses software).
I also want to reply to one of the comments above: "How will schools and universities (or anyone) ever know if you wrote it or Chat GPT?"
At the moment, I would not care, as an unskilled user would produce low quality work (such as student theses) with it (for now) - so I would know but could not proof it, but just critize the low quality as for every other low quality work (also in peer reviews) - if a skillfull user uses it as a tool - I would probably not know, but as I currently believe that the quality depends on the skill and knowledge level of the user to benefit from it - I do not care either.
Final thought to the cited statement: Just because one can not proof misconduct, does not make it right. In the academic context we always depend on a certain amount of trust when people produce content - I can not proof if a student pays someone else to ghost write their theses either. That is why we aks students for written assurances that the work was written independently and only with the help of all cited tools and sources.
Dear Dr Sylvia,
I recommend to read this manuscript.
ChatGPT in Academic Writing and Publishing: A Comprehensive Guide
Scientific writing is a difficult task that requires clarity, precision, and rigour. It also involves a large amount of research, analysis, and synthesis of information from various sources. However, scientific writing is also hard, time-consuming, and susceptible to errors. Advanced artificial intelligence (AI) models, such as ChatGPT, can simplify academic writing and publishing. ChatGPT has many applications and uses in academic and scientific writing and publishing such as hypothesis generation, literature review, safety recommendations, troubleshooting, tips, paraphrasing and summarising, editing, and proofreading, journal selection, journal style formatting, and other applications.
In this book chapter, we will discuss the main advantages, examples, and applications of ChatGPT in academic and scientific writing from research conception to publishing.
Read online.
https://achtago.com/publications/list/chatgpt-in-academic-writing-and-publishing/
Download full text
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369817340_Chapter_2_ChatGPT_in_Academic_Writing_and_Publishing_A_Comprehensive_Guide
I recommend to read this manuscript.
ChatGPT in Academic Writing and Publishing: A Comprehensive Guide
Scientific writing is a difficult task that requires clarity, precision, and rigour. It also involves a large amount of research, analysis, and synthesis of information from various sources. However, scientific writing is also hard, time-consuming, and susceptible to errors. Advanced artificial intelligence (AI) models, such as ChatGPT, can simplify academic writing and publishing. ChatGPT has many applications and uses in academic and scientific writing and publishing such as hypothesis generation, literature review, safety recommendations, troubleshooting, tips, paraphrasing and summarising, editing, and proofreading, journal selection, journal style formatting, and other applications.
In this book chapter, we will discuss the main advantages, examples, and applications of ChatGPT in academic and scientific writing from research conception to publishing.
Read online.
https://achtago.com/publications/list/chatgpt-in-academic-writing-and-publishing/
Download full text
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369817340_Chapter_2_ChatGPT_in_Academic_Writing_and_Publishing_A_Comprehensive_Guide
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publication