ChatGPT and the Future of Writing about Writing
Open accessIntegrity 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?
Reflective assessment can be incorporated when using ChatGPT to complete writing tasks, which promotes creative thinking and aligns with the teaching principle that the focus of the writing task is on the process.
“According to the user-centered teaching philosophy, reflective assessment can be incorporated when using ChatGPT to complete writing tasks, which not only promotes students' creative thinking but also aligns with the teaching principle that the focus of the writing task is not on the article itself but on the process.”
From The Intelligent Writing Revolution: The Transformation of AI Writing Tools in College English Writing Teaching in the Past Five Years (2026) · cites this paper as [13]
Evaluating AI-written articles can help students deepen their understanding and use of AI tools, and reflect through the evaluation to improve their writing thinking.
“For example, in a university English writing class, evaluating AI-written articles can help students deepen their understanding and use of AI tools, while also enabling them to reflect through the evaluation to improve their writing thinking [13].”
From The Intelligent Writing Revolution: The Transformation of AI Writing Tools in College English Writing Teaching in the Past Five Years (2026) · cites this paper as [13]
Cites
Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning
Bandura, A. (1993) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3 · Cited by 7,655 · see citing works
Wicked Problems in Design Thinking
Buchanan, R. (1992) · Design Issues · doi:10.2307/1511637 · Cited by 3,539 · see citing works
Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003 · Cited by 2,119 · see citing works
A cognitive process theory of writing
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981) · College Composition & Communication · doi:10.58680/ccc198115885 · Cited by 1,025 · see citing works
Collaborative learning and the “conversation of mankind”
Bruffee, K. A. (1984) · College English · doi:10.2307/376924 · Cited by 1,016 · see citing works
ChatGPT Goes to Law SchoolPreprint
Choi, J. H., Hickman, K. E., Monahan, A., & Schwarcz, D. B. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4335905 · Cited by 522 · see citing works
Using digital story writing as a pedagogy to develop AI literacy among primary students
Ng, D. T. K., Luo, W., Chan, H. M. Y., & Chu, S. K. W. (2022) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100054 · Cited by 266 · see citing works
Chatterjee, J., & Dethlefs, N. (2023) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2022.100676 · Cited by 263 · see citing works
Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Approaches in Digital Education: A Systematic Revision
Munir, H., Vogel, B., & Jacobsson, A. (2022) · Information · doi:10.3390/info13040203 · Cited by 213 · see citing works
A commentary of GPT-3 in MIT Technology Review 2021
Zhang, M., & Li, J. (2021) · Fundamental Research · doi:10.1016/j.fmre.2021.11.011 · Cited by 211 · see citing works
What Can Design Thinking Offer Writing Studies?
Purdy, J. P. (2014) · College Composition and Communication · doi:10.58680/ccc201425449 · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Aljanabi, M., Ghazi, M., Ali, A. H., & Abed, S. A. (2023) · Iraqi Journal for Computer Science and Mathematics · doi:10.52866/ijcsm.2023.01.01.0018 · Cited by 139 · see citing works
Ma, L. (2021) · Mobile Information Systems · doi:10.1155/2021/2637439 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
Design Thinking and the Wicked Problem of Teaching Writing
Leverenz, C. S. (2014) · Computers and Composition · doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2014.07.001 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
ChatGPT Usage and LimitationsPreprint
Azaria, A. (2022) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/5ue7n · Cited by 115 · see citing works
User-Centered Design as a Foundation for Effective Online Writing Instruction
Greer, M., & Harris, H. S. (2018) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2018.05.006 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Natural Discourse: Toward Ecocomposition
Dobrin, S. I., & Weisser, C. R. (2002) · State University of New York Press eBooks · doi:10.1353/book4529 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Collaboration (in) Theory: Reworking the Social Turn’s Conversational Imperative
Duffy, W. (2014) · College English · doi:10.58680/ce201424743 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
STUDENT PERCEPTIONS OF AI-POWERED WRITING TOOLS: TOWARDS INDIVIDUALIZED TEACHING STRATEGIES
Burkhard, M. (2022) · doi:10.33965/celda2022_202207l010 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
“What Do You Mean I Wrote a C Paper?” Writing, Revision, and Self-Regulation
Feltham, M., & Sharen, C. M. (2015) · Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching · doi:10.22329/celt.v8i0.4259 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
The order of forms: realism, formalism, and social space
Corbett, M. J. (2020) · Nineteenth Century Contexts · doi:10.1080/08905495.2020.1775335 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
“I Hate Group Work!” Social Loafers, Indignant Peers, and the Drama of the Classroom
Isaac, M. L. (2012) · The English Journal · doi:10.58680/ej201218753 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
An investigation into EFL learners’ reflection in writing and the inhibitors to their reflection
Avarzamani, F., & Farahian, M. (2019) · Cogent Psychology · doi:10.1080/23311908.2019.1690817 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Co-Constructing Writing Knowledge: Students’ Collaborative Talk Across Contexts
Winzenried, M. A., Campbell, L., Chao, R., & Cardinal, A. (2017) · e-Publications@Marquette (Marquette University) · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Rademaekers, J. K., & Detweiler, L. (2019) · Double Helix A Journal of Critical Thinking and Writing · doi:10.37514/dbh-j.2019.7.1.02 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
(2019) · Double Helix A Journal of Critical Thinking and Writing · doi:10.37514/dbh-j.2019.7.1.01 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Analysis of Peer Review in a Student-Run Scientific Journal
Nedzesky, J., Bennett, M., & Klucevsekh, K. (2022) · Double Helix A Journal of Critical Thinking and Writing · doi:10.37514/dbh-j.2022.10.1.04 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Vie, S. (2008) · Review of Communication · doi:10.1080/15358590701586568 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
A Heuristic Approach to Selecting Technological Tools for Writing Instruction and Support
Anson, C. M. (2022) · The WAC Clearinghouse; University Press of Colorado eBooks · doi:10.37514/int-b.2022.1466.2.03 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
The writing process and grading students' writing
(2000) · ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report · doi:10.1002/aehe.3640270304 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
(2013) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/978-1-62396-152-7 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
The Use of COCA to Promote Writing Idiomaticity among Advanced Iranian EFL Learners
(2017) · International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature · doi:10.20431/2347-3134.0501003 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Evolving Impacts of GenAI Tools on Writing Centers
Lindberg, N., & Domingues, A. A. (2025) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-8059-8.ch004
Writing Instructors’ Pedagogical Decisions About Generative AI
Miller, S., & Bosch, N. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-29770-9_58
Cempellin, L., Serfling, N., Brink, M. T., Biesecker, M., Abbasi, S., Won, K., & Tazarv, M. (2026) · Teaching & Learning Inquiry The ISSOTL Journal · doi:10.20343/teachlearninqu.14.42
- Authors
- De Matas, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Massachusetts Amherst
- Venue
- Double Helix: A Journal of Critical Thinking and Writing
- Publisher
- The WAC Clearinghouse
- Published
- 2023
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-7
- ISSN
- 2372-7497 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4394631152
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 3.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- Double Helix A Journal of Critical Thinking and Writing (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Literary and Philosophical Studies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, generative AI, writing instruction, artificial intelligence in education, future of 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
