ChatGPT as Linguistic Equalizer? Quantifying LLM-Driven Lexical Shifts in Academic Writing

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.12317v1
• Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 14:11:24 GMT
• Title: ChatGPT as Linguistic Equalizer? Quantifying LLM-Driven Lexical Shifts in Academic Writing
• Authors: Dingkang Lin, Naixuan Zhao, Dan Tian, Jiang Li,
• Abstract summary: This study investigates whether ChatGPT mitigates barriers and fosters equity by analyzing lexical complexity shifts across 2.8 million articles from OpenAlex ( 2020-2024)<n>We demonstrate that ChatGPT significantly enhances lexical complexity in NNES-authored abstracts, even after controlling for article-level controls, authorship patterns, and venue norms.<n>These findings provide causal evidence that ChatGPT reduces linguistic disparities and promotes equity in global academia.
• Score: 2.0117661599862164
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The advent of ChatGPT has profoundly reshaped scientific research practices, particularly in academic writing, where non-native English-speakers (NNES) historically face linguistic barriers. This study investigates whether ChatGPT mitigates these barriers and fosters equity by analyzing lexical complexity shifts across 2.8 million articles from OpenAlex (2020-2024). Using the Measure of Textual Lexical Diversity (MTLD) to quantify vocabulary sophistication and a difference-in-differences (DID) design to identify causal effects, we demonstrate that ChatGPT significantly enhances lexical complexity in NNES-authored abstracts, even after controlling for article-level controls, authorship patterns, and venue norms. Notably, the impact is most pronounced in preprint papers, technology- and biology-related fields and lower-tier journals. These findings provide causal evidence that ChatGPT reduces linguistic disparities and promotes equity in global academia.

Related papers

• Divergent LLM Adoption and Heterogeneous Convergence Paths in Research Writing [0.8046044493355781]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are reshaping content creation and academic writing. This study investigates the impact of AI-assisted generative revisions on research manuscripts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-18T11:09:16Z)
• Human-LLM Coevolution: Evidence from Academic Writing [0.0]
  We report a marked drop in the frequency of several words previously identified as overused by ChatGPT, such as "delve"<n>The frequency of certain other words favored by ChatGPT, such as "significant", has instead kept increasing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-13T18:55:56Z)
• Impact of ChatGPT on the writing style of condensed matter physicists [6.653378613306849]
  We estimate the impact of ChatGPT's release on the writing style of condensed matter papers on arXiv. Our analysis reveals a statistically significant improvement in the English quality of abstracts written by non-native English speakers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-30T14:37:10Z)
• PhonologyBench: Evaluating Phonological Skills of Large Language Models [57.80997670335227]
  Phonology, the study of speech's structure and pronunciation rules, is a critical yet often overlooked component in Large Language Model (LLM) research. We present PhonologyBench, a novel benchmark consisting of three diagnostic tasks designed to explicitly test the phonological skills of LLMs. We observe a significant gap of 17% and 45% on Rhyme Word Generation and Syllable counting, respectively, when compared to humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-03T04:53:14Z)
• DEMASQ: Unmasking the ChatGPT Wordsmith [63.8746084667206]
  We propose an effective ChatGPT detector named DEMASQ, which accurately identifies ChatGPT-generated content. Our method addresses two critical factors: (i) the distinct biases in text composition observed in human- and machine-generated content and (ii) the alterations made by humans to evade previous detection methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-08T21:13:05Z)
• Counting the Bugs in ChatGPT's Wugs: A Multilingual Investigation into the Morphological Capabilities of a Large Language Model [23.60677380868016]
  Large language models (LLMs) have recently reached an impressive level of linguistic capability, prompting comparisons with human language skills. Here, we conduct the first rigorous analysis of the morphological capabilities of ChatGPT in four typologically varied languages. We find that ChatGPT massively underperforms purpose-built systems, particularly in English.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T17:21:03Z)
• Is ChatGPT Involved in Texts? Measure the Polish Ratio to Detect ChatGPT-Generated Text [48.36706154871577]
  We introduce a novel dataset termed HPPT (ChatGPT-polished academic abstracts) It diverges from extant corpora by comprising pairs of human-written and ChatGPT-polished abstracts instead of purely ChatGPT-generated texts. We also propose the "Polish Ratio" method, an innovative measure of the degree of modification made by ChatGPT compared to the original human-written text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-21T06:38:37Z)
• Simple Linguistic Inferences of Large Language Models (LLMs): Blind Spots and Blinds [59.71218039095155]
  We evaluate language understanding capacities on simple inference tasks that most humans find trivial. We target (i) grammatically-specified entailments, (ii) premises with evidential adverbs of uncertainty, and (iii) monotonicity entailments. The models exhibit moderate to low performance on these evaluation sets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T06:41:09Z)
• Assessing the potential of LLM-assisted annotation for corpus-based pragmatics and discourse analysis: The case of apology [9.941695905504282]
  This study explores the possibility of using large language models (LLMs) to automate pragma-discursive corpus annotation.<n>We find that GPT-4 outperformed GPT-3.5, with accuracy approaching that of a human coder.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-15T04:10:13Z)
• ChatGPT Beyond English: Towards a Comprehensive Evaluation of Large Language Models in Multilingual Learning [70.57126720079971]
  Large language models (LLMs) have emerged as the most important breakthroughs in natural language processing (NLP) This paper evaluates ChatGPT on 7 different tasks, covering 37 diverse languages with high, medium, low, and extremely low resources. Compared to the performance of previous models, our extensive experimental results demonstrate a worse performance of ChatGPT for different NLP tasks and languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-12T05:08:52Z)
• Comparative Analysis of CHATGPT and the evolution of language models [0.0]
  This paper highlights the prevailing ideas in NLP, including machine translation, machine summarization, question-answering, and language generation. A strategy for validating the arguments and results of ChatGPT is presented summarily as an example of safe, large-scale adoption of Large Language Models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-28T03:11:28Z)
• Error Analysis Prompting Enables Human-Like Translation Evaluation in Large Language Models [57.80514758695275]
  Using large language models (LLMs) for assessing the quality of machine translation (MT) achieves state-of-the-art performance at the system level. We propose a new prompting method called textbftextttError Analysis Prompting (EAPrompt) This technique emulates the commonly accepted human evaluation framework - Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM) and textitproduces explainable and reliable MT evaluations at both the system and segment level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-24T05:05:03Z)
• Consistency Analysis of ChatGPT [65.268245109828]
  This paper investigates the trustworthiness of ChatGPT and GPT-4 regarding logically consistent behaviour. Our findings suggest that while both models appear to show an enhanced language understanding and reasoning ability, they still frequently fall short of generating logically consistent predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-11T01:19:01Z)
• A Multitask, Multilingual, Multimodal Evaluation of ChatGPT on Reasoning, Hallucination, and Interactivity [79.12003701981092]
  We carry out an extensive technical evaluation of ChatGPT using 23 data sets covering 8 different common NLP application tasks. We evaluate the multitask, multilingual and multi-modal aspects of ChatGPT based on these data sets and a newly designed multimodal dataset. ChatGPT is 63.41% accurate on average in 10 different reasoning categories under logical reasoning, non-textual reasoning, and commonsense reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-08T12:35:34Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.