Supporting Novice Researchers to Write Literature Review using Language Models
Abstract
A literature review requires more than summarization. While language model-based services and systems increasingly assist in analyzing accurate content in papers, their role in supporting novice researchers to develop independent perspectives on literature remains underexplored. We propose the design and evaluation of a system that supports the writing of argumentative narratives from literature. Based on the barriers faced by novice researchers before, during, and after writing, identified through semi-structured interviews, we propose a prototype of a language-model-assisted academic writing system that scaffolds the literature review writing process. A series of workshop studies revealed that novice researchers found the support valuable as they could initiate writing, co-create satisfying contents, and develop agency and confidence through a long-term dynamic partnership with the AI.
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?
In the Academic context, translating support provides preliminary drafts or helps the user to restructure their ideas in a different form, but encourages the user to write and integrate ideas on their own.
“Translating support provides preliminary drafts or helps the user to restructure their ideas in a different form (e.g., point form to prose), but encourages the user to write and integrate ideas on their own [21,122,124].”
From Co-Writing with AI, on Human Terms: Aligning Research with User Demands Across the Writing Process (2025) · cites this paper as [21]
Cites
Metaphoria: An Algorithmic Companion for Metaphor Creation
Gero, K. I., & Chilton, L. B. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3290605.3300526 · Cited by 146 · see citing works
It Is Your Turn: Collaborative Ideation With a Co-Creative Robot through Sketch
Lin, Y., Guo, J., Chen, Y., Yao, C., & Ying, F. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376258 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Co-Writing with AI, on Human Terms: Aligning Research with User Demands Across the Writing Process
Reza, M., Thomas-Mitchell, J., Dushniku, P., Laundry, N., Williams, J. J., & Kuzminykh, A. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3757566 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Where Do I 'Add the Egg'?: Exploring Agency and Ownership in AI Creative Co-Writing Systems
Carrera, D., Thomas-Mitchell, J., & Wigdor, D. (2026) · Proceedings of the 2026 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791952 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
- Authors
- Choe, K., Park, S., Jung, S., Kim, H., Yang, J. W., Hong, H., & Seo, J.
- Affiliations
- Seoul National University (KR)
- Northwestern University (US)
- Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KR)
- Venue
- Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2024-05-02
- Pages
- 1-9
- OpenAlex
- W4396832129
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4
- FWCI
- 24.71
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) (publishedVersion)
- KAIST Institutional Repository (KAIST) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Keywords
- literature review writing, novice researchers, language models, AI-assisted writing, writing scaffolding, academic writing support, researcher agency, human-AI collaboration
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