# Better by you, better than me, chatgpt3 as writing assistance in students essays

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.04536 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04536/

## Key facts

- Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 1 of its 37 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 9 Feb 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [ChatGPT: The End of Online Exam Integrity?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09292/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 9 of 9)

- [Visual cognition in multimodal large language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.16093/) (2023)
- [Is ChatGPT a Good Teacher Coach? Measuring Zero-Shot Performance For Scoring and Providing Actionable Insights on Classroom Instruction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.03090/) (2023)
- [Exploring the Frontiers of LLMs in Psychological Applications: A Comprehensive Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.01519/) (2024)
- [Customizing Large Language Model Generation Style using Parameter-Efficient Finetuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.04574/) (2024)
- [Generative AI in Writing Research Papers: A New Type of Algorithmic Bias and Uncertainty in Scholarly Work](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.10057/) (2023)
- [To what extent is ChatGPT useful for language teacher lesson plan creation?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.09974/) (2024)
- [Artificial intelligence and the transformation of higher education institutions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.08143/) (2024)
- [Beyond Automation: Socratic AI, Epistemic Agency, and the Implications of the Emergence of Orchestrated Multi-Agent Learning Architectures](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.05116/) (2025)
- [What happens when reviewers receive AI feedback in their reviews?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.13817/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Aim: To compare students' essay writing performance with or without employing ChatGPT-3 as a writing assistant tool. Materials and methods: Eighteen students participated in the study (nine in control and nine in the experimental group that used ChatGPT-3). We scored essay elements with grades (A-D) and corresponding numerical values (4-1). We compared essay scores to students' GPTs, writing time, authenticity, and content similarity. Results: Average grade was C for both groups; for control (2.39, SD=0.71) and for experimental (2.00, SD=0.73). None of the predictors affected essay scores: group (P=0.184), writing duration (P=0.669), module (P=0.388), and GPA (P=0.532). The text unauthenticity was slightly higher in the experimental group (11.87%, SD=13.45 to 9.96%, SD=9.81%), but the similarity among essays was generally low in the overall sample (the Jaccard similarity index ranging from 0 to 0.054). In the experimental group, AI classifier recognized more potential AI-generated texts. Conclusions: This study found no evidence that using GPT as a writing tool improves essay quality since the control group outperformed the experimental group in most parameters.