Human-AI Collaborative Writing: Sharing the Rhetorical Task Load
Abstract
This paper describes a work in progress case study of professional writers who use an AI writing assistant to generate digital marketing copy. To examine the impact of AI on the practice of professional writing, the author considers how using the AI writing assistant affects the cognitive task load experienced by human writers during each of the five canons of rhetoric, which he calls rhetorical load sharing. The author provides a working definition of AI writing technologies, describes an emerging human-machine collaborative writing process, and demonstrates what the rhetorical load sharing approach looks like for invention, the first canon of rhetoric.
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?
AI tools like ChatGPT and QuillBot can enhance the collaborative nature of the writing process without diminishing students' ownership of their work.
“By offering suggestions, structure, and feedback traditionally provided by teachers or peers, AI tools like ChatGPT (https://openai.com/index/chatgpt/,accessed on 16 April 2025) and QuillBot (https://quillbot.com/,accessed on 16 April 2025)) can enhance the collaborative nature of the writing process without diminishing students' ownership of their work [19].”
From AI-Integrated Scaffolding to Enhance Agency and Creativity in K-12 English Language Learners: A Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as [19]
The advent of GAI-assisted writing is altering conventional cognitive processes in writing, as AI assumes part of the cognitive burden.
“Nevertheless, the advent of GAI-assisted writing is altering the conventional cognitive processes in writing, as AI assumes part of the cognitive burden (Knowles, 2022).”
From Ink and algorithm: Exploring temporal dynamics in generative <scp>AI</scp> ‐assisted writing (2026) · cites this paper as Knowles, 2022
Cites
Machine learning: Trends, perspectives, and prospects
Jordan, M. I., & Mitchell, T. M. (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaa8415 · Cited by 9,955 · see citing works
Ong, W. J. (1982) · doi:10.4324/9780203328064 · Cited by 6,993 · see citing works
Progress and prospects of the human–robot collaboration
Ajoudani, A., Zanchettin, A. M., Ivaldi, S., Albu‐Schäffer, A., Kosuge, K., & Khatib, O. (2017) · Autonomous Robots · doi:10.1007/s10514-017-9677-2 · Cited by 848 · see citing works
Printing and Protestants: An Empirical Test of the Role of Printing in the Reformation
Rubin, J. (2013) · The Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.1162/rest_a_00368 · Cited by 157 · see citing works
Littman, M. L., Ajunwa, I., Berger, G., Boutilier, C. E., Currie, M. E., Doshi‐Velez, F., Hadfield, G. K., Horowitz, M. C., Isbell, C. L., Kitano, H., et al. (2022) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2210.15767 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Computers and the Teaching of Writing in American Higher Education, 1979-1994: A History
Hawisher, G. E., LeBlanc, P., Moran, C., & Selfe, C. L. (1997) · College Composition and Communication · doi:10.2307/358464 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
A Century of Higher Education for American Women
Bushey, J. H., & Newcomer, M. (1960) · AAUP Bulletin · doi:10.2307/40215024 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
The Computer as Stylus and Audience
Daiute, C. A. (1983) · College Composition and Communication · doi:10.2307/357400 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Computerized grammar checkers 2000: capabilities, limitations, and pedagogical possibilities
Vernon, A. (2000) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/s8755-4615(00)00038-4 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Why technology matters to writing: A cyberwriter’s tale
Porter, J. (2003) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2003.08.020 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
A note on composition and artificial intelligence
Burns, H. (1983) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/s8755-4615(83)80003-6 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
The evolution of the computers and writing conference
Gerrard, L. (1995) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/s8755-4615(05)80066-0 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Rhetoric and Artificial Intelligence
Hunter, L. (1991) · Rhetorica · doi:10.1525/rh.1991.9.4.317 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Computers across the curriculum: Using Writer's Workbench
Harris, M., & Cheek, M. (1984) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/s8755-4615(84)80003-1 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Composition on the computer: Simple systems and artificial intelligence
Phillips, G. M., & Erlwein, B. R. (1988) · Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1080/01463378809369729 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A scholarly dialogue: writing scholarship, authorship, academic integrity and the challenges of AI
Wise, B., Emerson, L., Van Luyn, A., Dyson, B., Bjork, C., & Thomas, S. E. (2024) · Higher Education Research & Development · doi:10.1080/07294360.2023.2280195 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Machine-in-the-loop writing: Optimizing the rhetorical load
Knowles, A. M. (2024) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102826 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Self-citationLi, M., & Wilson, J. (2025) · Information · doi:10.3390/info16070519 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Introduction: Composing with generative AI
Ranade, N., & Eyman, D. (2024) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102834 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Modifying AI, Enhancing Essays: How Active Engagement with Generative AI Boosts Writing Quality
Yang, K., Raković, M., Liang, Z., Yan, L., Zeng, Z., Fan, Y., Gašević, D., & Chen, G. (2025) · Proceedings of the 15th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference · doi:10.1145/3706468.3706544 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Li, R. (2024) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102825 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Breckner, K., Neumayr, T., Mara, M., Streit, M., & Augstein, M. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2482742 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Ink and algorithm: Exploring temporal dynamics in generative <scp>AI</scp> ‐assisted writing
Yang, K., Cheng, Y., Zhao, L., Raković, M., Swiecki, Z., Gašević, D., & Chen, G. (2026) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.70031 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
The Ethics of (Non)disclosure: Large Language Models in Professional, Nonacademic Writing Contexts
Piller, E. (2023) · Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities · doi:10.21659/rupkatha.v15n4.02 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Sanz-Valdivieso, L. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication · doi:10.1109/tpc.2024.3419288 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Counselor-AI Collaborative Transcription and Editing System for Child Counseling Analysis
Lee, H., Lee, J., Yang, M., Lee, D., Song, H., Han, Y., & Han, J. (2025) · ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) · doi:10.1145/3708359.3712081 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
BlogGen AI: An AI-Powered Blogging Platform for Automated Content Creation
Ashwini, M., & Ray, V. (2025) · International Journal of Innovative Research in Information Security · doi:10.26562/ijiris.2025.v1102.01
Symposium: The Future of Rhetoric and Writing Studies In The Asia-Pacific
Wise, B., & Thomas, S. E. (2026) · Rhetoric Review · doi:10.1080/07350198.2026.2662186
- Authors
- Knowles, A. M.
- Affiliations
- Miami University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Knowles, Alan M.
- ORCID
- Knowles, Alan M.
- Venue
- 2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2022-07
- Pages
- 257-261
- OpenAlex
- W4295308792
- Cited by
- 13
- References
- 15
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 54.13
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Rhetoric and Communication Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- human-AI collaboration, AI writing tools, professional writing, inventions, human-machine collaboration, writing practices
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
