No humans-in-the-loop: The people-less stories generated by GPT

Abstract In the last two years, numerous news outlets and academic articles have claimed that GPT-produced text is indistinguishable from human-written text across several genres. In this essay, we argue that not only does GPT not write fictional narratives like a human, it also often fails to write about humans. We demonstrate how the distribution of stylistic features that we can use as proxies for key elements of narrative, including the frequency of named entities, dialogue, pronouns and the second person, can reliably distinguish between human and GPT-generated text. We argue that these textual markers point to a deeper conceptual difference between human-written and GPT-generated text — GPT texts contain few characters, rarely feature a characterized narrator, and describe inanimate objects more often than people or characters. In sum, the thousands of GPT-generated narratives we analyzed struggled to meet the commonly accepted definition of narrative in contemporary narrative theory, which emphasizes the centrality of the human experience in narrative representation, and encompasses the broader rhetorical communication circuit in which narrative takes place.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Narrative Inquiry
Published
2026-11-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.25153.car
Primary Topic
Narrative Theory and Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
article

No humans-in-the-loop: The people-less stories generated by GPT

Gabi Kirilloff, Claudia Carroll
Narrative Inquiry
Narrative Theory and Analysis
article

No humans-in-the-loop: The people-less stories generated by GPT

Gabi Kirilloff, Claudia Carroll
article en

Abstract

Abstract In the last two years, numerous news outlets and academic articles have claimed that GPT-produced text is indistinguishable from human-written text across several genres. In this essay, we argue that not only does GPT not write fictional narratives like a human, it also often fails to write about humans. We demonstrate how the distribution of stylistic features that we can use as proxies for key elements of narrative, including the frequency of named entities, dialogue, pronouns and the second person, can reliably distinguish between human and GPT-generated text. We argue that these textual markers point to a deeper conceptual difference between human-written and GPT-generated text — GPT texts contain few characters, rarely feature a characterized narrator, and describe inanimate objects more often than people or characters. In sum, the thousands of GPT-generated narratives we analyzed struggled to meet the commonly accepted definition of narrative in contemporary narrative theory, which emphasizes the centrality of the human experience in narrative representation, and encompasses the broader rhetorical communication circuit in which narrative takes place.

Narrative Inquiry
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Narrative Theory and Analysis
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.

Laika access coming soon