Can we trust LLMs to help us? An examination of the potential use of GPT-4 in generating quality literature reviews

Purpose This study aims to examine the ability of Generative Pre-trained Transformer 4 (GPT-4), one of the most powerful large language models, to generate a literature review for peer-reviewed journal publications. The objective is to determine whether business scholars can rely on GPT-4’s assistance with literature reviews and how the nature of human–artificial intelligence (AI) interaction may affect the quality of the reviews generated by GPT-4. Design/methodology/approach A survey of 30 experienced researchers was conducted to assess the quality of the literature reviews generated by GPT-4 in comparison with a human-authored literature review published in a Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) journal. The data collected were then analyzed with analysis of variance to ascertain whether we may trust GPT-4’s assistance in writing literature reviews. Findings The statistical analysis reveals that when a highly structured approach being used, GPT-4 can generate a high-quality review comparable to that found in an SSCI journal publication. However, when a less structured approach is used, the generated review lacks comprehensive understating and critical analysis, and is unable to identify literature gaps for future research, although it performed well in adequate synthesis and quality writing. The findings suggest that we may trust GPT-4 to generate literature reviews that align with the publication standards of a peer-reviewed journal when using a structured approach to human–AI interaction. Research limitations/implications The findings suggest that we may trust GPT-4 to generate literature reviews that align with the publication standards of a peer-reviewed journal when using a structured approach to human–AI interaction. Nonetheless, cautions should be taken due to the limitations of this study discussed in the text. Originality/value By breaking down the specific tasks of a literature review and using a quantitative rather than qualitative assessment method, this study provides robust and more objective findings about the ability of GPT-4 to assist us with a very important research task. The findings of this study should enhance our understanding of how GPT-4 may change our research endeavor and how we may take a full advantage of the advancement in AI technology in the future research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Nankai Business Review International
Published
2024-09-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/nbri-12-2023-0115
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Radiology practices and education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.83
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can we trust LLMs to help us? An examination of the potential use of GPT-4 in generating quality literature reviews

Min Zhao, Haiyang Chen, Zheng Li, Fuan Li et al.
7 citations
Nankai Business Review International
Radiology practices and education
2.83
article

Can we trust LLMs to help us? An examination of the potential use of GPT-4 in generating quality literature reviews

Min Zhao, Haiyang Chen, Zheng Li, Fuan Li, Francis Cai
article en
7 citations

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to examine the ability of Generative Pre-trained Transformer 4 (GPT-4), one of the most powerful large language models, to generate a literature review for peer-reviewed journal publications. The objective is to determine whether business scholars can rely on GPT-4’s assistance with literature reviews and how the nature of human–artificial intelligence (AI) interaction may affect the quality of the reviews generated by GPT-4. Design/methodology/approach A survey of 30 experienced researchers was conducted to assess the quality of the literature reviews generated by GPT-4 in comparison with a human-authored literature review published in a Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) journal. The data collected were then analyzed with analysis of variance to ascertain whether we may trust GPT-4’s assistance in writing literature reviews. Findings The statistical analysis reveals that when a highly structured approach being used, GPT-4 can generate a high-quality review comparable to that found in an SSCI journal publication. However, when a less structured approach is used, the generated review lacks comprehensive understating and critical analysis, and is unable to identify literature gaps for future research, although it performed well in adequate synthesis and quality writing. The findings suggest that we may trust GPT-4 to generate literature reviews that align with the publication standards of a peer-reviewed journal when using a structured approach to human–AI interaction. Research limitations/implications The findings suggest that we may trust GPT-4 to generate literature reviews that align with the publication standards of a peer-reviewed journal when using a structured approach to human–AI interaction. Nonetheless, cautions should be taken due to the limitations of this study discussed in the text. Originality/value By breaking down the specific tasks of a literature review and using a quantitative rather than qualitative assessment method, this study provides robust and more objective findings about the ability of GPT-4 to assist us with a very important research task. The findings of this study should enhance our understanding of how GPT-4 may change our research endeavor and how we may take a full advantage of the advancement in AI technology in the future research.

Nankai Business Review InternationalVol. 16(1)
Western Carolina University (US), Liaoning University (CN), Shanxi Agricultural University (CN), William Paterson University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Radiology practices and education
2.83
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.