Complementing but Not Replacing: Comparing the Impacts of GPT-4 and Native-Speaker Interaction on Chinese L2 Writing Outcomes.

IF 2.5 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Zhaoyang Shan, Zhangyuan Song, Xu Jiang, Wen Chen, Luyao Chen
{"title":"Complementing but Not Replacing: Comparing the Impacts of GPT-4 and Native-Speaker Interaction on Chinese L2 Writing Outcomes.","authors":"Zhaoyang Shan, Zhangyuan Song, Xu Jiang, Wen Chen, Luyao Chen","doi":"10.3390/bs15040540","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study explored the efficacy of large language models (LLMs), namely GPT-4, in supporting second language (L2) writing in comparison with interaction with a human language partner in the pre-writing phase. A within-subject behavioral experiment was conducted with 23 Chinese L2 learners who were exposed to three conditions: \"without interaction\", \"interaction with GPT-4\", and \"interaction with a language partner\". They then completed an L2 writing task. It was found that interaction with the language partner yielded significantly improved results compared with both interaction with GPT-4 and the case without interaction in terms of overall writing scores, organization, and language. Additionally, both types of interaction enhanced the participants' topic familiarity and writing confidence and reduced the task's perceived difficulty compared with the case without interaction. Interestingly, in the \"interaction with GPT-4\" condition, topic familiarity was positively correlated with better writing outcomes, whereas in the \"interaction with a language partner\" condition, perceived difficulty was positively correlated with content scores; however, content scores were negatively associated with writing confidence. This study suggests that LLMs should be used to complement and not replace human language partners in the L2 pre-writing phase.</p>","PeriodicalId":8742,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences","volume":"15 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12023996/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15040540","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study explored the efficacy of large language models (LLMs), namely GPT-4, in supporting second language (L2) writing in comparison with interaction with a human language partner in the pre-writing phase. A within-subject behavioral experiment was conducted with 23 Chinese L2 learners who were exposed to three conditions: "without interaction", "interaction with GPT-4", and "interaction with a language partner". They then completed an L2 writing task. It was found that interaction with the language partner yielded significantly improved results compared with both interaction with GPT-4 and the case without interaction in terms of overall writing scores, organization, and language. Additionally, both types of interaction enhanced the participants' topic familiarity and writing confidence and reduced the task's perceived difficulty compared with the case without interaction. Interestingly, in the "interaction with GPT-4" condition, topic familiarity was positively correlated with better writing outcomes, whereas in the "interaction with a language partner" condition, perceived difficulty was positively correlated with content scores; however, content scores were negatively associated with writing confidence. This study suggests that LLMs should be used to complement and not replace human language partners in the L2 pre-writing phase.

互补而非替代:比较GPT-4和母语者互动对汉语第二语言写作结果的影响。
本研究探讨了大型语言模型(LLMs),即GPT-4,在支持第二语言写作方面的功效,并将其与人类语言伙伴在写作前阶段的互动进行了比较。对23名中国二语学习者进行了受试者内行为实验,他们分别处于“无互动”、“与GPT-4互动”和“与语言伙伴互动”三种情况下。然后他们完成了一项第二语言写作任务。研究发现,与GPT-4互动和没有互动的情况相比,与语言伙伴的互动在总体写作分数、组织和语言方面取得了显著改善。此外,与没有互动的情况相比,两种类型的互动都增强了参与者的主题熟悉度和写作信心,并降低了任务的感知难度。有趣的是,在“与GPT-4互动”条件下,主题熟悉度与更好的写作成绩正相关,而在“与语言伙伴互动”条件下,感知困难与内容分数正相关;然而,内容分数与写作信心呈负相关。这项研究表明,llm应该被用来补充而不是取代第二语言写作前阶段的人类语言伙伴。
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
Behavioral Sciences
Behavioral Sciences Social Sciences-Development
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
429
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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