Co-Writing with AI: An Empirical Study of Diverse Academic Writing Workflows

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.25389v1
• Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2026 09:00:48 GMT
• Title: Co-Writing with AI: An Empirical Study of Diverse Academic Writing Workflows
• Abstract summary: This study examines how students engage with AI across different writing tasks.<n>Individual factors including AI literacy, writing confidence, trust, authorship concerns, and motivation are studied.<n>We suggest that AI integration is selective and heterogeneous, forming three recurring and value-oriented configurations.
• Score: 3.657364561148215
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Despite AI tools becoming increasingly embedded in academic practice, little is known about how university students integrate them into their writing processes. We examine how students engage with AI across different writing tasks, and how this engagement is shaped by individual factors including AI literacy, writing confidence, trust, authorship concerns, and motivation. Study~1 surveys 107 UK university students to map task-specific and co-occurring patterns of AI use across five writing stages (ideation, sourcing, planning, drafting, and reviewing) and their associations with individual factors. Study~2 complements this by exploring how these patterns can be assembled in practice, through interviews with 12 postgraduates reflecting on their established use of AI in assessed writing. Together, the studies suggest that AI integration is selective and heterogeneous, forming three recurring and value-oriented configurations: (1) early-stage (learning-oriented), where tools support exploration and understanding; (2) late-stage (quality-oriented), where tools support drafting and refinement; and (3) peripheral (productivity-oriented), where tools are used to reduce friction and sustain momentum across the process. We offer a workflow-level account of AI-supported academic writing, showing how students navigate competing priorities of learning, quality, productivity, and authorship, and how they evaluate and take responsibility for AI-generated outputs.

Related papers

• Framing, Judging, Steering: An Assessable Competency Model for Teach-ing Students to Reason With Generative AI [47.027290803102666]
  We propose CoRe-3 (Co-Reasoning), a competency model factoring productive AI use into three assessable skills.<n>We ground the skills in theory, state five testable propositions, and instantiate them in CoReasoningLab.<n>Human-rater agreement and outcomes are next; we release the instrument, data, and protocol.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T10:25:31Z)
• Auditing Student-AI Collaboration: A Case Study of Online Graduate CS Students [0.0]
  generative AI increasingly shapes how students complete academic tasks.<n>Concerns persist regarding over-automation, diminished student agency, and the potential for unreliable or hallucinated outputs.<n>This study conducts a mixed-methods audit of student-AI collaboration preferences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-13T16:21:54Z)
• Writing With Machines and Peers: Designing for Critical Engagement with Generative AI [5.719812010814006]
  This study proposes a pedagogical design that integrates AI and peer feedback in a graduate-level academic writing activity.<n>Students developed literature review projects through multiple writing and revision stages, receiving feedback from both a custom-built AI reviewer and human peers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-19T02:17:42Z)
• AI in the Writing Process: How Purposeful AI Support Fosters Student Writing [0.3641292357963815]
  The ubiquity of technologies like ChatGPT has raised concerns about their impact on student writing.<n>This paper investigates how different AI support approaches affect writers' sense of agency and depth of knowledge transformation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T16:34:09Z)
• Human-AI Collaboration or Academic Misconduct? Measuring AI Use in Student Writing Through Stylometric Evidence [0.0]
  This research investigates the use of authorship verification (AV) techniques to quantify AI assistance in academic writing.<n>We use three datasets - including a public dataset (PAN-14) and two from University of Melbourne students from various courses.<n>We develop an adapted Feature Vector Difference AV methodology to construct robust academic writing profiles for students.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-13T00:36:36Z)
• Methodological Foundations for AI-Driven Survey Question Generation [41.94295877935867]
  This paper presents a methodological framework for using generative AI in educational survey research.<n>We explore how Large Language Models can generate adaptive, context-aware survey questions.<n>We examine ethical issues such as bias, privacy, and transparency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-02T09:50:34Z)
• AAAR-1.0: Assessing AI's Potential to Assist Research [34.88341605349765]
  We introduce AAAR-1.0, a benchmark dataset designed to evaluate large language models (LLMs) performance in three fundamental, expertise-intensive research tasks.<n> AAAR-1.0 differs from prior benchmarks in two key ways: first, it is explicitly research-oriented, with tasks requiring deep domain expertise; second, it is researcher-oriented, mirroring the primary activities that researchers engage in on a daily basis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T17:58:29Z)
• Effects of a Prompt Engineering Intervention on Undergraduate Students' AI Self-Efficacy, AI Knowledge and Prompt Engineering Ability: A Mixed Methods Study [36.48421439947282]
  This study designed and implemented a prompt engineering intervention at a university in Hong Kong. It examined students' AI self-efficacy, AI knowledge, and proficiency in creating effective prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-30T15:05:24Z)
• Charting the Future of AI in Project-Based Learning: A Co-Design Exploration with Students [35.05435052195561]
  The increasing use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) by students in learning presents new challenges for assessing their learning outcomes. This paper introduces a co-design study to explore the potential of students' AI usage data as a novel material for assessment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-26T14:49:29Z)
• Techniques for supercharging academic writing with generative AI [0.0]
  This Perspective maps out principles and methods for using generative artificial intelligence (AI) to elevate the quality and efficiency of academic writing.<n>We introduce a human-AI collaborative framework that delineates the rationale (why), process (how), and nature (what) of AI engagement in writing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T04:35:00Z)
• Stakeholder Participation in AI: Beyond "Add Diverse Stakeholders and Stir" [76.44130385507894]
  This paper aims to ground what we dub a 'participatory turn' in AI design by synthesizing existing literature on participation and through empirical analysis of its current practices. Based on our literature synthesis and empirical research, this paper presents a conceptual framework for analyzing participatory approaches to AI design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-01T17:57:04Z)

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.