REVIEW 1 cited by
LLMs as Writing Assistants: Exploring Perspectives on Sense of Ownership and Reasoning
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Sense of ownership in writing confines our investment of thoughts, time, and contribution, leading to attachment to the output. However, using writing assistants introduces a mental dilemma, as some content isn't directly our creation. For instance, we tend to credit Large Language Models (LLMs) more in creative tasks, even though all tasks are equal for them. Additionally, while we may not claim complete ownership of LLM-generated content, we freely claim authorship. We conduct a short survey to examine these issues and understand underlying cognitive processes in order to gain a better knowledge of human-computer interaction in writing and improve writing aid systems.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
JRE-L: Journalist, Reader, and Editor LLMs in the Loop for Science Journalism for the General Audience
A three-role LLM loop improves readability-formula scores of automatically generated science journalism without fine-tuning the base models.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.