Cargando…

Brain versus bot: Distinguishing letters of recommendation authored by humans compared with artificial intelligence

OBJECTIVES: Letters of recommendation (LORs) are essential within academic medicine, affecting a number of important decisions regarding advancement, yet these letters take significant amounts of time and labor to prepare. The use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT, ar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Preiksaitis, Carl, Nash, Christopher, Gottlieb, Michael, Chan, Teresa M., Alvarez, Al'ai, Landry, Adaira
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10688127/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38046089
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10924
_version_ 1785152118252896256
author Preiksaitis, Carl
Nash, Christopher
Gottlieb, Michael
Chan, Teresa M.
Alvarez, Al'ai
Landry, Adaira
author_facet Preiksaitis, Carl
Nash, Christopher
Gottlieb, Michael
Chan, Teresa M.
Alvarez, Al'ai
Landry, Adaira
author_sort Preiksaitis, Carl
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Letters of recommendation (LORs) are essential within academic medicine, affecting a number of important decisions regarding advancement, yet these letters take significant amounts of time and labor to prepare. The use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT, are gaining popularity for a variety of academic writing tasks and offer an innovative solution to relieve the burden of letter writing. It is yet to be determined if ChatGPT could aid in crafting LORs, particularly in high‐stakes contexts like faculty promotion. To determine the feasibility of this process and whether there is a significant difference between AI and human‐authored letters, we conducted a study aimed at determining whether academic physicians can distinguish between the two. METHODS: A quasi‐experimental study was conducted using a single‐blind design. Academic physicians with experience in reviewing LORs were presented with LORs for promotion to associate professor, written by either humans or AI. Participants reviewed LORs and identified the authorship. Statistical analysis was performed to determine accuracy in distinguishing between human and AI‐authored LORs. Additionally, the perceived quality and persuasiveness of the LORs were compared based on suspected and actual authorship. RESULTS: A total of 32 participants completed letter review. The mean accuracy of distinguishing between human‐ versus AI‐authored LORs was 59.4%. The reviewer's certainty and time spent deliberating did not significantly impact accuracy. LORs suspected to be human‐authored were rated more favorably in terms of quality and persuasiveness. A difference in gender‐biased language was observed in our letters: human‐authored letters contained significantly more female‐associated words, while the majority of AI‐authored letters tended to use more male‐associated words. CONCLUSIONS: Participants were unable to reliably differentiate between human‐ and AI‐authored LORs for promotion. AI may be able to generate LORs and relieve the burden of letter writing for academicians. New strategies, policies, and guidelines are needed to balance the benefits of AI while preserving integrity and fairness in academic promotion decisions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10688127
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106881272023-12-01 Brain versus bot: Distinguishing letters of recommendation authored by humans compared with artificial intelligence Preiksaitis, Carl Nash, Christopher Gottlieb, Michael Chan, Teresa M. Alvarez, Al'ai Landry, Adaira AEM Educ Train Original Contribution OBJECTIVES: Letters of recommendation (LORs) are essential within academic medicine, affecting a number of important decisions regarding advancement, yet these letters take significant amounts of time and labor to prepare. The use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT, are gaining popularity for a variety of academic writing tasks and offer an innovative solution to relieve the burden of letter writing. It is yet to be determined if ChatGPT could aid in crafting LORs, particularly in high‐stakes contexts like faculty promotion. To determine the feasibility of this process and whether there is a significant difference between AI and human‐authored letters, we conducted a study aimed at determining whether academic physicians can distinguish between the two. METHODS: A quasi‐experimental study was conducted using a single‐blind design. Academic physicians with experience in reviewing LORs were presented with LORs for promotion to associate professor, written by either humans or AI. Participants reviewed LORs and identified the authorship. Statistical analysis was performed to determine accuracy in distinguishing between human and AI‐authored LORs. Additionally, the perceived quality and persuasiveness of the LORs were compared based on suspected and actual authorship. RESULTS: A total of 32 participants completed letter review. The mean accuracy of distinguishing between human‐ versus AI‐authored LORs was 59.4%. The reviewer's certainty and time spent deliberating did not significantly impact accuracy. LORs suspected to be human‐authored were rated more favorably in terms of quality and persuasiveness. A difference in gender‐biased language was observed in our letters: human‐authored letters contained significantly more female‐associated words, while the majority of AI‐authored letters tended to use more male‐associated words. CONCLUSIONS: Participants were unable to reliably differentiate between human‐ and AI‐authored LORs for promotion. AI may be able to generate LORs and relieve the burden of letter writing for academicians. New strategies, policies, and guidelines are needed to balance the benefits of AI while preserving integrity and fairness in academic promotion decisions. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-11-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10688127/ /pubmed/38046089 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10924 Text en © 2023 The Authors. AEM Education and Training published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Contribution
Preiksaitis, Carl
Nash, Christopher
Gottlieb, Michael
Chan, Teresa M.
Alvarez, Al'ai
Landry, Adaira
Brain versus bot: Distinguishing letters of recommendation authored by humans compared with artificial intelligence
title Brain versus bot: Distinguishing letters of recommendation authored by humans compared with artificial intelligence
title_full Brain versus bot: Distinguishing letters of recommendation authored by humans compared with artificial intelligence
title_fullStr Brain versus bot: Distinguishing letters of recommendation authored by humans compared with artificial intelligence
title_full_unstemmed Brain versus bot: Distinguishing letters of recommendation authored by humans compared with artificial intelligence
title_short Brain versus bot: Distinguishing letters of recommendation authored by humans compared with artificial intelligence
title_sort brain versus bot: distinguishing letters of recommendation authored by humans compared with artificial intelligence
topic Original Contribution
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10688127/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38046089
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10924
work_keys_str_mv AT preiksaitiscarl brainversusbotdistinguishinglettersofrecommendationauthoredbyhumanscomparedwithartificialintelligence
AT nashchristopher brainversusbotdistinguishinglettersofrecommendationauthoredbyhumanscomparedwithartificialintelligence
AT gottliebmichael brainversusbotdistinguishinglettersofrecommendationauthoredbyhumanscomparedwithartificialintelligence
AT chanteresam brainversusbotdistinguishinglettersofrecommendationauthoredbyhumanscomparedwithartificialintelligence
AT alvarezalai brainversusbotdistinguishinglettersofrecommendationauthoredbyhumanscomparedwithartificialintelligence
AT landryadaira brainversusbotdistinguishinglettersofrecommendationauthoredbyhumanscomparedwithartificialintelligence