Disciplinary variation of metadiscourse: A comparison of human-written and ChatGPT-generated English research article abstracts
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There is a scarcity of large-scale, empirical research that quantifies exactly how AI-generated texts fail to engage readers.
“there is still a scarcity of large-scale, empirical research that quantifies exactly how AI-generated texts fails to engage readers.”
From How AI Constructs Stance: A Corpus-Based Comparison of Interactional Metadiscourse in Student and AI Essays (2025) · cites this paper as Zhang & Zhang, 2025
Cites
A Survey of Large Language Models
Zhao, W. X., Zhou, K., Li, J., Tang, T., Dong, Z., Hou, Y., Zhang, B., Min, Y., Zhang, J., Liu, P., et al. (2026) · Frontiers of Computer Science · doi:10.1007/s11704-026-60308-3 · Cited by 2,093 · see citing works
Self-citationA Survey of Large Language Models
Zhao, W. X., Zhou, K., Li, J., Tang, T., Wang, X., Hou, Y., Min, Y., Zhang, B., Zhang, J., Dong, Z., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.18223 · Cited by 2,090
Self-citationChatGPT: five priorities for research
van Dis, E. A. M., Bollen, J., Zuidema, W., van Rooij, R., & Bockting, C. L. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00288-7 · Cited by 1,842 · see citing works
Metadiscourse in Academic Writing: A Reappraisal
Hyland, K. (2004) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/25.2.156 · Cited by 1,241 · see citing works
Using ChatGPT for second language writing: pitfalls and potentials
Barrot, J. S. (2023) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2023.100745 · Cited by 770 · see citing works
Warschauer, M., Tseng, W., Yim, S., Webster, T., Jacob, S., Du, Q., & Tate, T. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4404380 · Cited by 425 · see citing works
Casal, J. E., & Kessler, M. (2023) · Research Methods in Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100068 · Cited by 261 · see citing works
Triguero, I., Molina, D., Poyatos, J., Del Ser, J., & Herrera, F. (2024) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2023.102135 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Zhang, M., & Zhang, J. (2026) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/amaf032 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
He, Q. (2025) · English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies · doi:10.22158/eltls.v7n6p103
- Authors
- Zhang, M., & Zhang, J.
- Affiliations
- Guangdong University of Foreign Studies (CN)
- Central China Normal University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Zhang, Man
- Zhang, Jiawei
- Venue
- Journal of English for Academic Purposes
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2025-07
- Volume
- 76
- Pages
- 101540
- ISSN
- 1475-1585 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4411591905
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 2
- FWCI
- 89.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of English for Academic Purposes (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Social Science Fund of China (22BYY012)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistic research and analysis
- Keywords
- metadiscourse, ChatGPT, large language models, research article abstracts, disciplinary variation, human-written vs machine-generated text, discourse functions, metadiscourse markers, academic writing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
