ChatGPT vs Human Writing: A Qualitative and Quantitative Study of IELTS Task 2 Authorship

Artificial intelligence tools, such as ChatGPT, have recently become increasingly prevalent in the academic world due to their remarkable capabilities for generating essays, including logical structure, contextual relevance, and advanced vocabulary. Undoubtedly, these tools outperform humans in many aspects; however, despite their language-driven strengths, machine-generated content exhibits apparent shortcomings that make it easily identifiable as machine-authored. This article examines the critical deficiencies and limitations of AI writing, with a focus on the significant qualitative and quantitative differences between human-written and automated texts. It emphasises the originality and emotional colouring of human writing while highlighting the absence of these qualities in AI-generated essays despite their linguistic advantages. These findings may guide educators in helping learners refine their writing skills, identify common errors in human writing, and recognise the unique style that distinguishes it from machine-generated writing. The outcomes can be helpful not only in the academic environment but also in AI development, making the generated texts more closely resemble human writing.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Path of Science
Published
2025-09-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.22178/pos.122-97
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

ChatGPT vs Human Writing: A Qualitative and Quantitative Study of IELTS Task 2 Authorship

Aida Mirzayeva
Path of Science
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

ChatGPT vs Human Writing: A Qualitative and Quantitative Study of IELTS Task 2 Authorship

Aida Mirzayeva
article en

Abstract

Artificial intelligence tools, such as ChatGPT, have recently become increasingly prevalent in the academic world due to their remarkable capabilities for generating essays, including logical structure, contextual relevance, and advanced vocabulary. Undoubtedly, these tools outperform humans in many aspects; however, despite their language-driven strengths, machine-generated content exhibits apparent shortcomings that make it easily identifiable as machine-authored. This article examines the critical deficiencies and limitations of AI writing, with a focus on the significant qualitative and quantitative differences between human-written and automated texts. It emphasises the originality and emotional colouring of human writing while highlighting the absence of these qualities in AI-generated essays despite their linguistic advantages. These findings may guide educators in helping learners refine their writing skills, identify common errors in human writing, and recognise the unique style that distinguishes it from machine-generated writing. The outcomes can be helpful not only in the academic environment but also in AI development, making the generated texts more closely resemble human writing.

Path of ScienceVol. 11(9)
Baku Higher Oil School (AZ)
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
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.