CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 284Social Robot Interaction and HRIAuthorship Attribution and ProfilingEthics and Social Impacts of AI

The DOI matches its DataCite record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The AI Ghostwriter Effect: When Users Do Not Perceive Ownership of AI-Generated Text But Self-Declare as Authors

Open access
Draxler, Fiona, Werner, Anna, Lehmann, Florian, Hoppe, Matthias, Schmidt, Albrecht, Buschek, Daniel, Welsch, Robin·2023·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2303.03283arXiv 2303.03283
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Human-AI interaction in text production increases complexity in authorship. In two empirical studies (n1 = 30 & n2 = 96), we investigate authorship and ownership in human-AI collaboration for personalized language generation. We show an AI Ghostwriter Effect: Users do not consider themselves the owners and authors of AI-generated text but refrain from publicly declaring AI authorship. Personalization of AI-generated texts did not impact the AI Ghostwriter Effect, and higher levels of participants' influence on texts increased their sense of ownership. Participants were more likely to attribute ownership to supposedly human ghostwriters than AI ghostwriters, resulting in a higher ownership-authorship discrepancy for human ghostwriters. Rationalizations for authorship in AI ghostwriters and human ghostwriters were similar. We discuss how our findings relate to psychological ownership and human-AI interaction to lay the foundations for adapting authorship frameworks and user interfaces in AI in text-generation tasks.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2303.03283

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The codebook thematic analysis developed initial codes from Flower & Hayes' cognitive process model and Lee et al.'s design space framework.

    “We employed a codebook thematic analysis approach, developing our initial codes from Flower & Hayes' cognitive process model [35] and Lee et al.'s design space framework [73].”

    From Co-Writing with AI, on Human Terms: Aligning Research with User Demands Across the Writing Process (2025) · cites this paper as [35]

    The “AI Support and the Cognition of Writing” section discusses the Flower and Hayes model, but does not say it was used to develop codes. The passages on analysis describe statistical methods, not a codebook thematic analysis. Searches for initial codes and Lee et al.’s design-space framework found no passage establishing the claimed coding approach. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 106

  1. Liz Allen, Alison O'Connell, and Veronique Kiermer. 2019. How can we ensure visibility and diversity in research contributions? How the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT) is helping the shift from authorship to contributorship. Learned Publishing 32, 1 (Jan. 2019), 71-74. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1210 · DOI
  2. Liz Allen, Alison O'Connell, and Veronique Kiermer. 2019. How can we ensure visibility and diversity in research contributions? How the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT) is helping the shift from authorship to contributorship. Learned Publishing 32, 1 (Jan. 2019), 71-74. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1210 · DOI
  3. Liz Allen, Jo Scott, Amy Brand, Marjorie Hlava, and Micah Altman. 2014. Publishing: Credit where credit is due. Nature 508, 7496 (April 2014), 312-313. https://doi.org/10.1038/508312a · DOI
  4. Kenneth C. Arnold, Krzysztof Z. Gajos, and Adam T. Kalai. 2016. On Suggesting Phrases vs. Predicting Words for Mobile Text Composition. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, Tokyo Japan, 603-608. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 2984511.2984584 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Clark D. Asay. 2020. Independent Creation in a World of AI. FIU Law Review 14, 2 (Jan. 2020), 201-222. https://doi.org/10.25148/lawrev.14.2.5 · DOI
  6. Rosa Maria Ballardini. 2019. AI-generated content: authorship and inventorship in the age of artificial intelligence. In Online Distribution of Content in the EU. Edward Elgar Publishing, 117-135. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788119900.00015 · DOI
  7. Ac Bd, Christine Bauer, and Afsaneh Doryab. 2016. Solving the Battle of First-Authorship: Using Interactive Technology to Highlight Contributions. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, San Jose California USA, 609-620. https://doi.org/10.1145/2851581.2892582 · DOI
  8. Joanna Bergström, Jarrod Knibbe, Henning Pohl, and Kasper Hornbæk. 2022. Sense of Agency and User Experience: Is There a Link? ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 29, 4 (Aug. 2022), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3490493 · DOI
  9. Advait Bhat, Saaket Agashe, Niharika Mohile, Parth Oberoi, Ravi Jangir, and Anirudha Joshi. 2022. Studying writer-suggestion interaction: A qualitative study to understand writer interaction with aligned/misaligned next-phrase suggestion. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2208.00636 arXiv:2208.00636 [cs]. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Xiaojun Bi, Tom Ouyang, and Shumin Zhai. 2014. Both Complete and Correct? Multi-Objective Optimization of Touchscreen Keyboard. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) (CHI '14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2297-2306. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557414 · DOI
  11. Oloff C. Biermann, Ning F. Ma, and Dongwook Yoon. 2022. From Tool to Companion: Storywriters Want AI Writers to Respect Their Personal Values and Writing Strategies. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference. ACM, Virtual Event Australia, 1209-1227. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3532106.3533506 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Amy Brand, Liz Allen, Micah Altman, Marjorie Hlava, and Jo Scott. 2015. Beyond authorship: attribution, contribution, collaboration, and credit. Learned Publishing 28, 2 (April 2015), 151-155. https://doi.org/10.1087/20150211 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Deborah Brandt. 2007. "Who's the President?": Ghostwriting and Shifting Values in Literacy. College English 69, 6 (2007), 549-571. Publisher: JSTOR.
  14. Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Sandhini Agarwal, Ariel Herbert-Voss, Gretchen Krueger, Tom Henighan, Rewon Child, Aditya Ramesh, Daniel Ziegler, Jeffrey Wu, Clemens Winter, Chris Hesse, Mark Chen, Eric Sigler, Mateusz Litwin, Scott Gray, Benjamin Chess, Jack Clark, Christopher Berner, Sam McCandlish, Alec Radford, Ilya Sutskever, and Dario Amodei. 2020. Language Models are Few-Shot Learners. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, H. Larochelle, M. Ranzato, R. Hadsell, M. F. Balcan, and H. Lin (Eds.), Vol. 33. Curran Associates, Inc., 1877-1901. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/file/1457c0d6bfcb4967418bfb8ac142f64a-Paper.pdf
  15. Daniel Buschek, Martin Zürn, and Malin Eiband. 2021. The Impact of Multiple Parallel Phrase Suggestions on Email Input and Composition Behaviour of Native and Non-Native English Writers. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 732, 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445372 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Ana Caraban, Evangelos Karapanos, Daniel Gonçalves, and Pedro Campos. 2019. 23 Ways to Nudge: A Review of Technology-Mediated Nudging in Human-Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300733 · DOI
  17. John Carvalho, Angie Chung, and Michael Koliska. 2021. Defying transparency: Ghostwriting from the Jazz Age to social media. Journalism 22, 3 (March 2021), 709-725. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884918804700 · DOI
  18. Mia Xu Chen, Benjamin N. Lee, Gagan Bansal, Yuan Cao, Shuyuan Zhang, Justin Lu, Jackie Tsay, Yinan Wang, Andrew M. Dai, Zhifeng Chen, Timothy Sohn, and Yonghui Wu. 2019. Gmail Smart Compose: Real-Time Assisted Writing. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining. ACM, Anchorage AK USA, 2287-2295. https://doi.org/10.1145/3292500.3330723 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Hyerim Cho, Chris Hubbles, and Heather Moulaison-Sandy. 2022. Individuals responsible for video games: an exploration of cataloging practice, user need and authorship theory. Journal of Documentation 78, 6 (Oct. 2022), 1420-1436. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-10-2021-0198 · DOI
  20. John Joon Young Chung, Shiqing He, and Eytan Adar. 2021. The Intersection of Users, Roles, Interactions, and Technologies in Creativity Support Tools. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2021. ACM, Virtual Event USA, 1817-1833. https://doi.org/10.1145/3461778.3462050 · DOI
  21. John Joon Young Chung, Wooseok Kim, Kang Min Yoo, Hwaran Lee, Eytan Adar, and Minsuk Chang. 2022. TaleBrush: Sketching Stories with Generative Pretrained Language Models. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New Orleans, LA, USA) (CHI '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 209, 19 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3501819 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Larry D. Claxton. 2005. Scientific authorship. Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research 589, 1 (Jan. 2005), 31-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.mrrev.2004.07.002 · DOI
  23. Ralph B. D'Agostino. 1971. An omnibus test of normality for moderate and large size samples. Biometrika 58, 2 (1971), 341-348. https: //doi.org/10.1093/biomet/58.2.341 · DOI
  24. Robert Dale. 2021. GPT-3: What's it good for? Natural Language Engineering 27, 1 (Jan. 2021), 113-118. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324920000601 · DOI
  25. Hai Dang, Karim Benharrak, Florian Lehmann, and Daniel Buschek. 2022. Beyond Text Generation: Supporting Writers with Continuous Automatic Text Summaries. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Bend, OR, USA) (UIST '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 98, 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3526113.3545672 · DOI
  26. N Dehouche. 2021. Plagiarism in the age of massive Generative Pre-trained Transformers (GPT-3). Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics 21 (March 2021), 17-23. https://doi.org/10.3354/esep00195 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Nicholas Diakopoulos, Kurt Luther, Yevgeniy (Eugene) Medynskiy, and Irfan Essa. 2007. The evolution of authorship in a remix society. In Proceedings of the 18th conference on Hypertext and hypermedia -HT '07. ACM Press, Manchester, UK, 133. https://doi.org/10.1145/1286240. · DOI · Paper page
  28. Shiran Dudy, Steven Bedrick, and Bonnie Webber. 2021. Refocusing on Relevance: Personalization in NLG. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online and Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, 5190-5202. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.421 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Justin Edwards, Allison Perrone, and Philip R. Doyle. 2020. Transparency in Language Generation: Levels of Automation. In Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Conversational User Interfaces. ACM, Bilbao Spain, 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1145/3405755.3406136 · DOI
  30. Lisa A. Elkin, Matthew Kay, James J. Higgins, and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2021. An Aligned Rank Transform Procedure for Multifactor Contrast Tests. In The 34th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, Virtual Event USA, 754-768. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3472749.3474784 · DOI
  31. Katherine Elkins and Jon Chun. 2020. Can GPT-3 Pass a Writer's Turing Test? Journal of Cultural Analytics 5, 2 (Sept. 2020), 16. https: //doi.org/10.22148/001c.17212 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Annette Flanagin, Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, Michael Berkwits, and Stacy L. Christiansen. 2023. Nonhuman "Authors" and Implications for the Integrity of Scientific Publication and Medical Knowledge. JAMA 329, 8 (02 2023), 637-639. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023.1344 arXiv:https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/2801170/jama_flanagin_2023_ed_230004_1676659370.84192.pdf · DOI · Paper page
  33. Luciano Floridi and Massimo Chiriatti. 2020. GPT-3: Its Nature, Scope, Limits, and Consequences. Minds and Machines 30, 4 (Dec. 2020), 681-694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Linda Flower and John R. Hayes. 1981. A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. College Composition and Communication 32, 4 (Dec. 1981), 365. https://doi.org/10.2307/356600 · DOI · Paper page
  35. Andrew Fowler, Kurt Partridge, Ciprian Chelba, Xiaojun Bi, Tom Ouyang, and Shumin Zhai. 2015. Effects of Language Modeling and Its Personalization on Touchscreen Typing Performance. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (CHI '15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 649-658. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 2702123.2702503 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Giorgio Franceschelli and Mirco Musolesi. 2022. Copyright in generative deep learning. Data & Policy 4 (2022), e17. https://doi.org/10.1017/dap. 2022.10 · DOI
  37. Tiffany Derville Gallicano, Kevin Brett, and Toby Hopp. 2013. Is ghost blogging like speechwriting? A survey of practitioners about the ethics of ghost blogging. Public Relations Journal 7, 3 (2013), 1-41.
  38. Katy Ilonka Gero and Lydia B. Chilton. 2019. Metaphoria: An Algorithmic Companion for Metaphor Creation. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300526 · DOI · Paper page
  39. Maliheh Ghajargar, Jeffrey Bardzell, and Love Lagerkvist. 2022. A Redhead Walks into a Bar: Experiences of Writing Fiction with Artificial Intelligence. In 25th International Academic Mindtrek conference. ACM, Tampere Finland, 230-241. https://doi.org/10.1145/3569219.3569418 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Gene V Glass, Percy D. Peckham, and James R. Sanders. 1972. Consequences of Failure to Meet Assumptions Underlying the Fixed Effects Analyses of Variance and Covariance. Review of Educational Research 42, 3 (Sept. 1972), 237-288. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543042003237 · DOI · Paper page
  41. Emma Goldenthal, Jennifer Park, Sunny X. Liu, Hannah Mieczkowski, and Jeffrey T. Hancock. 2021. Not All AI are Equal: Exploring the Accessibility of AI-Mediated Communication Technology. Computers in Human Behavior 125 (2021), 106975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106975 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Tanya Goyal, Junyi Jessy Li, and Greg Durrett. 2022. News Summarization and Evaluation in the Era of GPT-3. (2022). https://doi.org/10.48550/ ARXIV.2209.12356 Publisher: arXiv Version Number: 1. · DOI · Paper page
  43. Andreas Graefe. 2016. Guide to Automated Journalism. (2016). https://doi.org/10.7916/D80G3XDJ Publisher: Columbia University. · DOI
  44. Peter C Gøtzsche, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, Helle Krogh Johansen, Mette T Haahr, Douglas G Altman, and An-Wen Chan. 2007. Ghost Authorship in Industry-Initiated Randomised Trials. PLoS Medicine 4, 1 (Jan. 2007), e19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040019 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Peter C Gøtzsche, Jerome P Kassirer, Karen L Woolley, Elizabeth Wager, Adam Jacobs, Art Gertel, and Cindy Hamilton. 2009. What Should Be Done To Tackle Ghostwriting in the Medical Literature? PLoS Medicine 6, 2 (Feb. 2009), e1000023. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000023 · DOI
  46. Jeffrey T Hancock, Mor Naaman, and Karen Levy. 2020. AI-Mediated Communication: Definition, Research Agenda, and Ethi- cal Considerations. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 25, 1 (01 2020), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmz022 arXiv:https://academic.oup.com/jcmc/article-pdf/25/1/89/32961176/zmz022.pdf · DOI · Paper page
  47. Michael R. Harwell, Elaine N. Rubinstein, William S. Hayes, and Corley C. Olds. 1992. Summarizing Monte Carlo Results in Methodological Research: The One-and Two-Factor Fixed Effects ANOVA Cases. Journal of Educational Statistics 17, 4 (Dec. 1992), 315-339. https://doi.org/10. 3102/10769986017004315 · DOI
  48. Marc Hassenzahl, Michael Burmester, and Franz Koller. 2003. AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität. In Mensch & Computer 2003, Gerd Szwillus and Jürgen Ziegler (Eds.). Vol. 57. Vieweg+Teubner Verlag, Wiesbaden, 187-196. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-80058-9_19 Series Title: Berichte des German Chapter of the ACM. · DOI · Paper page
  49. Marc Hassenzahl and Andrew Monk. 2010. The Inference of Perceived Usability From Beauty. Human-Computer Interaction 25, 3 (July 2010), 235-260. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2010.500139 · DOI
  50. John R. Hayes. 2012. Modeling and Remodeling Writing. Written Communication 29, 3 (July 2012), 369-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0741088312451260 Publisher: SAGE Publications Inc. · DOI · Paper page
  51. D. Jeffery Higginbotham. 1992. Evaluation of keystroke savings across five assistive communication technologies. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 8, 4 (Jan. 1992), 258-272. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434619212331276303 · DOI
  52. Jess Hohenstein and Malte Jung. 2020. AI as a moral crumple zone: The effects of AI-mediated communication on attribution and trust. Computers in Human Behavior 106 (2020), 106190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106190 · DOI · Paper page
  53. Joo-Wha Hong, Ignacio Cruz, and Dmitri Williams. 2021. AI, you can drive my car: How we evaluate human drivers vs. self-driving cars. Computers in Human Behavior 125 (Dec. 2021), 106944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106944 · DOI
  54. Joo Wha Hong, Qiyao Peng, and Dmitri Williams. 2021. Are you ready for artificial Mozart and Skrillex? An experiment testing expectancy violation theory and AI music. New Media & Society 23, 7 (July 2021), 1920-1935. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820925798 · DOI · Paper page
  55. Anna Y.Q. Huang, Owen H.T. Lu, and Stephen J.H. Yang. 2023. Effects of artificial Intelligence-Enabled personalized recommendations on learners' learning engagement, motivation, and outcomes in a flipped classroom. Computers & Education 194 (March 2023), 104684. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104684 · DOI · Paper page
  56. Cheng-Zhi Anna Huang, Ashish Vaswani, Jakob Uszkoreit, Noam Shazeer, Ian Simon, Curtis Hawthorne, Andrew M. Dai, Matthew D. Hoffman, Monica Dinculescu, and Douglas Eck. 2018. Music Transformer. (2018). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1809.04281 Publisher: arXiv Version Number: 3. · DOI
  57. Jani Ihalainen. 2018. Computer creativity: artificial intelligence and copyright. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 13, 9 (Sept. 2018), 724-728. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpy031 · DOI
  58. Maurice Jakesch, Advait Bhat, Daniel Buschek, Lior Zalmanson, and Mor Naaman. 2023. Co-Writing with Opinionated Language Models Affects Users' Views. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581196 arXiv:2302.00560 [cs]. · DOI · Paper page
  59. Maurice Jakesch, Megan French, Xiao Ma, Jeffrey T. Hancock, and Mor Naaman. 2019. AI-Mediated Communication: How the Perception That Profile Text Was Written by AI Affects Trustworthiness. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300469 · DOI · Paper page
  60. Anjuli Kannan, Karol Kurach, Sujith Ravi, Tobias Kaufmann, Andrew Tomkins, Balint Miklos, Greg Corrado, Laszlo Lukacs, Marina Ganea, Peter Young, and Vivek Ramavajjala. 2016. Smart Reply: Automated Response Suggestion for Email. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (San Francisco, California, USA) (KDD '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 955-964. https://doi.org/10.1145/2939672.2939801 · DOI
  61. Jurgis Karpus, Adrian Krüger, Julia Tovar Verba, Bahador Bahrami, and Ophelia Deroy. 2021. Algorithm exploitation: Humans are keen to exploit benevolent AI. iScience 24, 6 (June 2021), 102679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2021.102679 · DOI · Paper page
  62. Dongwhan Kim and Joonhwan Lee. 2019. Designing an Algorithm-Driven Text Generation System for Personalized and Interactive News Reading. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 35, 2 (Jan. 2019), 109-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1437864 · DOI
  63. Sangmi Kim, Seong-Gyu Kim, Yoonsin Jeon, Soojin Jun, and Jinwoo Kim. 2016. Appropriate or Remix? The Effects of Social Recognition and Psychological Ownership on Intention to Share in Online Communities. Human-Computer Interaction 31, 2 (March 2016), 97-132. https: //doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2015.1022425 · DOI
  64. Joanna Kisker, Thomas Gruber, and Benjamin Schöne. 2021. Virtual reality experiences promote autobiographical retrieval mechanisms: Electro- physiological correlates of laboratory and virtual experiences. Psychological Research 85, 7 (Oct. 2021), 2485-2501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426- 020-01417-x · DOI
  65. Thomas Kosch, Robin Welsch, Lewis Chuang, and Albrecht Schmidt. 2023. The Placebo Effect of Artificial Intelligence in Human-Computer Interaction. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 29, 6, Article 56 (jan 2023), 32 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3529225 · DOI · Paper page
  66. Per Ola Kristensson and Keith Vertanen. 2014. The inviscid text entry rate and its application as a grand goal for mobile text entry. In Proceedings of the 16th international conference on Human-computer interaction with mobile devices & services (MobileHCI '14). Association for Computing Machinery, Toronto, ON, Canada, 335-338. https://doi.org/10.1145/2628363.2628405 · DOI · Paper page
  67. Tiffany H. Kung, Morgan Cheatham, ChatGPT, Arielle Medenilla, Czarina Sillos, Lorie De Leon, Camille Elepaño, Maria Madriaga, Rimel Aggabao, Giezel Diaz-Candido, James Maningo, and Victor Tseng. 2022. Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-Assisted Medical Education Using Large Language Models. preprint. Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.19.22283643 · DOI · Paper page
  68. Mina Lee, Percy Liang, and Qian Yang. 2022. CoAuthor: Designing a Human-AI Collaborative Writing Dataset for Exploring Language Model Capabilities. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New Orleans LA USA, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102. 3502030 · DOI · Paper page
  69. Florian Lehmann, Niklas Markert, Hai Dang, and Daniel Buschek. 2022. Suggestion Lists vs. Continuous Generation: Interaction Design for Writing with Generative Models on Mobile Devices Affect Text Length, Wording and Perceived Authorship. In Mensch und Computer 2022. ACM, Darmstadt Germany, 192-208. https://doi.org/10.1145/3543758.3543947 · DOI · Paper page
  70. Angelica Lermann Henestrosa, Hannah Greving, and Joachim Kimmerle. 2023. Automated journalism: The effects of AI authorship and evaluative information on the perception of a science journalism article. Computers in Human Behavior 138 (Jan. 2023), 107445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. chb.2022.107445 · DOI
  71. Lisa Lines. 2016. Ghostwriters guaranteeing grades? The quality of online ghostwriting services available to tertiary students in Australia. Teaching in Higher Education 21, 8 (Nov. 2016), 889-914. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1198759 · DOI · Paper page
  72. Jiachang Liu, Dinghan Shen, Yizhe Zhang, Bill Dolan, Lawrence Carin, and Weizhu Chen. 2021. What Makes Good In-Context Examples for GPT-$3$? (2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2101.06804 Publisher: arXiv Version Number: 1. · DOI · Paper page
  73. Li Lucy and David Bamman. 2021. Gender and Representation Bias in GPT-3 Generated Stories. In Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Narrative Understanding. Association for Computational Linguistics, Virtual, 48-55. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.nuse-1.5 · DOI · Paper page
  74. Hannah Mieczkowski and Jeffrey Hancock. 2022. Examining Agency, Expertise, and Roles of AI Systems in AI-Mediated Communication. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/asnv4 · DOI · Paper page
  75. Hannah Mieczkowski, Jeffrey T. Hancock, Mor Naaman, Malte Jung, and Jess Hohenstein. 2021. AI-Mediated Communication: Language Use and Interpersonal Effects in a Referential Communication Task. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 5, CSCW1, Article 17 (apr 2021), 14 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449091 · DOI · Paper page
  76. Tal Montal and Zvi Reich. 2017. I, Robot. You, Journalist. Who is the Author?: Authorship, bylines and full disclosure in automated journalism. Digital Journalism 5, 7 (Aug. 2017), 829-849. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2016.1209083 · DOI · Paper page
  77. Magne Nylenna, Frode Fagerbakk, and Peter Kierulf. 2014. Authorship: attitudes and practice among Norwegian researchers. BMC Medical Ethics 15, 1 (Dec. 2014), 53. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-15-53 · DOI
  78. Siobhan O'Connor and ChatGPT. 2023. Open artificial intelligence platforms in nursing education: Tools for academic progress or abuse? Nurse Education in Practice 66 (Jan. 2023), 103537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2022.103537 · DOI · Paper page
  79. Fengjiao Peng, Veronica Crista LaBelle, Emily Christen Yue, and Rosalind W. Picard. 2018. A Trip to the Moon: Personalized Animated Movies for Self-reflection. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Montreal QC Canada, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173827 · DOI
  80. Peter Potash, Alexey Romanov, and Anna Rumshisky. 2015. GhostWriter: Using an LSTM for Automatic Rap Lyric Generation. In Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, Lisbon, Portugal, 1919-1924. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D15-1221 · DOI
  81. Philip Quinn and Shumin Zhai. 2016. A Cost-Benefit Study of Text Entry Suggestion Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA) (CHI '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 83-88. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858305 · DOI
  82. Björn Rasch and Jan Born. 2013. About Sleep's Role in Memory. Physiological Reviews 93, 2 (April 2013), 681-766. https://doi.org/10.1152/ physrev.00032.2012 · DOI · Paper page
  83. Emily Reif, Daphne Ippolito, Ann Yuan, Andy Coenen, Chris Callison-Burch, and Jason Wei. 2021. A Recipe For Arbitrary Text Style Transfer with Large Language Models. (2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2109.03910 Publisher: arXiv Version Number: 4. · DOI
  84. Linda A. Riley and Stuart C. Brown. 1996. Crafting a public image: An empirical study of the ethics of ghostwriting. Journal of Business Ethics 15, 7 (July 1996), 711-720. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00381736 · DOI
  85. Nataniel Ruiz, Yuanzhen Li, Varun Jampani, Yael Pritch, Michael Rubinstein, and Kfir Aberman. 2023. DreamBooth: Fine Tuning Text-to-Image Diffusion Models for Subject-Driven Generation. (June 2023), 22500-22510. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR52729.2023.02155 · DOI · Paper page
  86. Pamela Samuelson. 2020. AI authorship? Commun. ACM 63, 7 (June 2020), 20-22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3401718 · DOI · Paper page
  87. Benjamin Schöne, Marlene Wessels, and Thomas Gruber. 2019. Experiences in Virtual Reality: a Window to Autobiographical Memory. Current Psychology 38, 3 (June 2019), 715-719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-017-9648-y · DOI
  88. Ben Shneiderman. 2003. The Eyes Have It: A Task by Data Type Taxonomy for Information Visualizations. In The Craft of Information Visualization, BENJAMIN B. Bederson and BEN Shneiderman (Eds.). Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, 364-371. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-155860915- 0/50046-9 · DOI · Paper page
  89. Ben Shneiderman. 2020. Bridging the Gap Between Ethics and Practice: Guidelines for Reliable, Safe, and Trustworthy Human-centered AI Systems. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems 10, 4 (Dec. 2020), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3419764 · DOI · Paper page
  90. Ben Shneiderman. 2020. Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence: Reliable, Safe & Trustworthy. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 36, 6 (April 2020), 495-504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1741118 · DOI · Paper page
  91. Julia Silge and David Robinson. 2016. tidytext: Text Mining and Analysis Using Tidy Data Principles in R. Journal of Open Source Software 1, 3 (2016), 37. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00037 · DOI
  92. Nikhil Singh, Guillermo Bernal, Daria Savchenko, and Elena L. Glassman. 2023. Where to Hide a Stolen Elephant: Leaps in Creative Writing with Multimodal Machine Intelligence. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 30, 5, Article 68 (sep 2023), 57 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3511599 · DOI · Paper page
  93. Bob L. T. Sturm, Maria Iglesias, Oded Ben-Tal, Marius Miron, and Emilia Gómez. 2019. Artificial Intelligence and Music: Open Questions of Copyright Law and Engineering Praxis. Arts 8, 3 (Sept. 2019), 115. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts8030115 · DOI · Paper page
  94. Reid Swanson and Andrew S. Gordon. 2012. Say Anything: Using Textual Case-Based Reasoning to Enable Open-Domain Interactive Storytelling. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems 2, 3 (Sept. 2012), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/2362394.2362398 · DOI · Paper page
  95. Adam Tapal, Ela Oren, Reuven Dar, and Baruch Eitam. 2017. The Sense of Agency Scale: A Measure of Consciously Perceived Control over One's Mind, Body, and the Immediate Environment. Frontiers in Psychology 8 (Sept. 2017), 1552. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01552 · DOI
  96. The PLoS Medicine Editors. 2009. Ghostwriting: The Dirty Little Secret of Medical Publishing That Just Got Bigger. PLoS Medicine 6, 9 (Sept. 2009), e1000156. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000156 · DOI
  97. Alexey Tikhonov and Ivan P Yamshchikov. 2018. Guess who? Multilingual approach for the automated generation of author-stylized poetry. In 2018 IEEE Spoken Language Technology Workshop (SLT). IEEE, Athens, Greece, 787-794. https://doi.org/10.1109/SLT.2018.8639573 · DOI
  98. Adaku Uchendu, Zeyu Ma, Thai Le, Rui Zhang, and Dongwon Lee. 2021. TURINGBENCH: A Benchmark Environment for Turing Test in the Age of Neural Text Generation. (2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2109.13296 Publisher: arXiv Version Number: 1. · DOI
  99. Kristen Vaccaro, Dylan Huang, Motahhare Eslami, Christian Sandvig, Kevin Hamilton, and Karrie Karahalios. 2018. The Illusion of Control: Placebo Effects of Control Settings. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Montreal QC Canada, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173590 · DOI · Paper page
  100. Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is All you Need. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, I.
  101. Ziwen Wang, Jie Wang, Haiqian Gu, Fei Su, and Bojin Zhuang. 2018. Automatic Conditional Generation of Personalized Social Media Short Texts. In PRICAI 2018: Trends in Artificial Intelligence, Xin Geng and Byeong-Ho Kang (Eds.). Vol. 11013. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 56-63. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97310-4_7 Series Title: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. · DOI
  102. J. S. Wislar, A. Flanagin, P. B. Fontanarosa, and C. D. DeAngelis. 2011. Honorary and ghost authorship in high impact biomedical journals: a cross sectional survey. BMJ 343, oct25 1 (Oct. 2011), d6128-d6128. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d6128 · DOI · Paper page
  103. Paweł W. Woźniak, Jakob Karolus, Florian Lang, Caroline Eckerth, Johannes Schöning, Yvonne Rogers, and Jasmin Niess. 2021. Creepy Tech- nology:What Is It and How Do You Measure It?. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Yokohama Japan, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445299 · DOI
  104. Beta Writer. 2019. Lithium-Ion Batteries: A Machine-Generated Summary of Current Research. Springer International Publishing, Cham. https: //doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16800-1 · DOI · Paper page
  105. Diyi Yang and Lucie Flek. 2021. Towards User-Centric Text-to-Text Generation: A Survey. In Text, Speech, and Dialogue, Kamil Ekštein, František Pártl, and Miloslav Konopík (Eds.). Vol. 12848. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 3-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83527-9_1 Series Title: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. · DOI · Paper page
  106. Ann Yuan, Andy Coenen, Emily Reif, and Daphne Ippolito. 2022. Wordcraft: Story Writing With Large Language Models. In 27th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 841-852. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3490099.3511105 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Draxler, F., Werner, A., Lehmann, F., Hoppe, M., Schmidt, A., Buschek, D., & Welsch, R.
Affiliations
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • University of Bayreuth (DE)
  • Aalto University (FI)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
1-40
ISSN
1073-0516 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2303.03283
arXiv
2303.03283
OpenAlex
W4389913593
Cited by
284
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 170 · 2025: 84 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 2
FWCI
56.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Aaltodoc (Aalto University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
European Commission (952026, HORIZON2020)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Authorship Attribution and Profiling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
authorship, ownership attribution, AI-generated text, human-AI collaboration, psychological ownership, human-AI interaction

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