Comparing Student and Writing Instructor Perceptions of Academic Dishonesty When Collaborators Are Artificial Intelligence or Human

IF 1.8 2区 文学 Q3 BUSINESS
John R. Gallagher, Kyle Wagner
{"title":"Comparing Student and Writing Instructor Perceptions of Academic Dishonesty When Collaborators Are Artificial Intelligence or Human","authors":"John R. Gallagher, Kyle Wagner","doi":"10.1177/10506519241239937","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It remains unclear if perceptions of academic dishonesty concerning artificial intelligence writing technologies (AIWTs) present new challenges or if they reflect prior, non-AI concerns. To structure this problem, we used a randomized control survey experiment. We compared student ( n = 603) and instructor ( n = 312) attitudes toward dishonesty in collaborations involving humans versus AIWT in 10 writing-related scenarios. Results suggest similar perception patterns among students and instructors, with both populations expressing significant differences in perceived dishonesty between AI and human collaborators in some scenarios. This experiment structures the problem of AI writing and academic dishonesty for future research in this emerging field.","PeriodicalId":46414,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business and Technical Communication","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business and Technical Communication","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10506519241239937","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It remains unclear if perceptions of academic dishonesty concerning artificial intelligence writing technologies (AIWTs) present new challenges or if they reflect prior, non-AI concerns. To structure this problem, we used a randomized control survey experiment. We compared student ( n = 603) and instructor ( n = 312) attitudes toward dishonesty in collaborations involving humans versus AIWT in 10 writing-related scenarios. Results suggest similar perception patterns among students and instructors, with both populations expressing significant differences in perceived dishonesty between AI and human collaborators in some scenarios. This experiment structures the problem of AI writing and academic dishonesty for future research in this emerging field.
比较学生和写作指导教师对人工智能和人类合作者学术不端行为的看法
关于人工智能写作技术(AIWTs)的学术不诚实问题,是带来了新的挑战,还是反映了以前的非人工智能问题,目前仍不清楚。为了解决这个问题,我们采用了随机对照调查实验。我们比较了学生(n = 603)和教师(n = 312)在10个与写作相关的场景中对人类与人工智能写作技术合作中的不诚实行为的态度。结果表明,学生和教师的感知模式相似,在某些场景中,学生和教师对人工智能和人类合作者之间的不诚实感知存在显著差异。这项实验为人工智能写作和学术不诚实问题的未来研究提供了新的思路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
18.20%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: JBTC is a refereed journal that provides a forum for discussion of communication practices, problems, and trends in business, professional, scientific, and governmental fields. As such, JBTC offers opportunities for bridging dichotomies that have traditionally existed in professional communication journals between business and technical communication and between industrial and academic audiences. Because JBTC is designed to disseminate knowledge that can lead to improved communication practices in both academe and industry, the journal favors research that will inform professional communicators in both sectors. However, articles addressing one sector or the other will also be considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信