固有虚假人工智能交流和故意虚假人类交流的语言标记:来自酒店评论的证据

IF 2 3区 文学 Q2 COMMUNICATION Journal of Language and Social Psychology Pub Date : 2023-09-11 DOI:10.1177/0261927x231200201
David M. Markowitz, Jeffrey T. Hancock, Jeremy N. Bailenson
{"title":"固有虚假人工智能交流和故意虚假人类交流的语言标记:来自酒店评论的证据","authors":"David M. Markowitz, Jeffrey T. Hancock, Jeremy N. Bailenson","doi":"10.1177/0261927x231200201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To the human eye, AI-generated outputs of large language models have increasingly become indistinguishable from human-generated outputs. Therefore, to determine the linguistic properties that separate AI-generated text from human-generated text, we used a state-of-the-art chatbot, ChatGPT, and compared how it wrote hotel reviews to human-generated counterparts across content (emotion), style (analytic writing, adjectives), and structural features (readability). Results suggested AI-generated text had a more analytic style and was more affective, more descriptive, and less readable than human-generated text. Classification accuracies of AI-generated versus human-generated texts were over 80%, far exceeding chance (∼50%). Here, we argue AI-generated text is inherently false when communicating about personal experiences that are typical of humans and differs from intentionally false human-generated text at the language level. Implications for AI-mediated communication and deception research are discussed.","PeriodicalId":47861,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Social Psychology","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Linguistic Markers of Inherently False AI Communication and Intentionally False Human Communication: Evidence From Hotel Reviews\",\"authors\":\"David M. Markowitz, Jeffrey T. Hancock, Jeremy N. Bailenson\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0261927x231200201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"To the human eye, AI-generated outputs of large language models have increasingly become indistinguishable from human-generated outputs. Therefore, to determine the linguistic properties that separate AI-generated text from human-generated text, we used a state-of-the-art chatbot, ChatGPT, and compared how it wrote hotel reviews to human-generated counterparts across content (emotion), style (analytic writing, adjectives), and structural features (readability). Results suggested AI-generated text had a more analytic style and was more affective, more descriptive, and less readable than human-generated text. Classification accuracies of AI-generated versus human-generated texts were over 80%, far exceeding chance (∼50%). Here, we argue AI-generated text is inherently false when communicating about personal experiences that are typical of humans and differs from intentionally false human-generated text at the language level. Implications for AI-mediated communication and deception research are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Language and Social Psychology\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Language and Social Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x231200201\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Language and Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x231200201","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在人类眼中,人工智能生成的大型语言模型的输出越来越难以与人类生成的输出区分。因此,为了确定将人工智能生成的文本与人类生成的文本区分开来的语言属性,我们使用了最先进的聊天机器人ChatGPT,并比较了它如何在内容(情感)、风格(分析写作、形容词)和结构特征(可读性)方面与人类生成的同类撰写酒店评论。结果表明,与人类生成的文本相比,人工智能生成的文本具有更多的分析风格,更有情感,更具描述性,可读性更差。人工智能生成的文本与人类生成的文本的分类准确率超过80%,远远超过机会(约50%)。在这里,我们认为人工智能生成的文本在交流人类典型的个人经历时本质上是错误的,这与语言层面上人为生成的虚假文本不同。讨论了人工智能介导的沟通和欺骗研究的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Linguistic Markers of Inherently False AI Communication and Intentionally False Human Communication: Evidence From Hotel Reviews
To the human eye, AI-generated outputs of large language models have increasingly become indistinguishable from human-generated outputs. Therefore, to determine the linguistic properties that separate AI-generated text from human-generated text, we used a state-of-the-art chatbot, ChatGPT, and compared how it wrote hotel reviews to human-generated counterparts across content (emotion), style (analytic writing, adjectives), and structural features (readability). Results suggested AI-generated text had a more analytic style and was more affective, more descriptive, and less readable than human-generated text. Classification accuracies of AI-generated versus human-generated texts were over 80%, far exceeding chance (∼50%). Here, we argue AI-generated text is inherently false when communicating about personal experiences that are typical of humans and differs from intentionally false human-generated text at the language level. Implications for AI-mediated communication and deception research are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
14.30%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: The Journal of Language and Social Psychology explores the social dimensions of language and the linguistic implications of social life. Articles are drawn from a wide range of disciplines, including linguistics, cognitive science, sociology, communication, psychology, education, and anthropology. The journal provides complete and balanced coverage of the latest developments and advances through original, full-length articles, short research notes, and special features as Debates, Courses and Conferences, and Book Reviews.
期刊最新文献
Announcing International Symposium on Intergroup Communication (ISIC3) Presence and Pronouns: An Exploratory Investigation into the Language of Social VR The Grammar of Persuasion: A Meta-Analytic Review Disconfirming the Role of Nouns as Linguistic Cues of Subsequent Behavior Reminding May Not Be Enough: Overcoming the Male Dominance of the Generic Masculine How Positive and Negative Intergroup Contact May Shape the Communication of Discrimination Toward Migrants
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1