Abstract

This study compares AI-generated (ChatGPT and Gemini) and human-written business refusal texts. A genre analysis found that AI-generated texts are formulaic and less nuanced than human-written texts. Applying a rating of professional writing quality, inferential statistics revealed no significant difference in scores between Gemini and human-written texts, but revealed ChatGPT as lower. Human assessors identified authorship of AI-generated texts with an accuracy rate of 68.1%, and human-written texts with 86% accuracy. Key concerns for assessors were tone, relationship, language choice, content, and structure. The findings inform four key areas of focus for teaching business writing in the AI age.

Journal
Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
Published
2025-03-12
DOI
10.1177/23294906251322890
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (2)

  1. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  2. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly

Cites in this index (7)

  1. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  2. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  3. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  4. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  5. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
Show all 7 →
  1. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  2. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Also cites 33 works outside this index ↓
  1. AlAfnan M. A. Dishari S. Jovic M. Lomidze K. (2023). ChatGPT as an educational tool: Opportunities challenges…
  2. Bhullar P. S. Joshi M. Chugh R. (2024). ChatGPT in higher education—A synthesis of the literature and a futur…
  3. 10.1075/scl.28
  4. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
  5. 10.1177/002194369002700403
  6. Campbell K. S. Naidoo J. S. Smith J. (2023). When your boss says “You need to sound more professional”: Writi…
  7. Casal J. E. Kessler M. (2023). Can linguists distinguish between ChatGPT/AI and human writing?: A study of re…
  8. Creelman V. (2012). The case for “living” models. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly 75(2) 176…
  9. de Rycker A. G. H. (2014). Mitigation in turning down business proposals across cultures: The case for pragma…
  10. Devitt A. J. (2015). Genre performances: John Swales’ genre analysis and rhetorical-linguistic genre studies.…
  11. Dhillon P. S. Molaei S. Li J. Golub M. Zheng S. Robert L. P. (2024). Shaping human-AI collaboration: Varied s…
  12. Flowerdew L. (2012). Exploiting a corpus of business letters from a phraseological functional perspective. Re…
  13. Fraser L. Harich K. Norby J. Brzovic K. Rizkallah T. Loewy D. (2005). Diagnostic and value-added assessment o…
  14. Gunser V. E. Gottschling S. Brucker B. Richter S. Gerjets P. (2021). Can users distinguish narrative texts wr…
  15. 10.1016/S0889-4906(99)00037-X
  16. Herbold S. Hautli-Janisz A. Heuer U. Kikteva Z. Trautsch A. (2023). A large-scale comparison of human-written…
  17. Hyland K. (2022). English for Specific Purposes: What is it and where is it taking us? ESP Today 10(2) 202–22…
  18. Jansen F. Janssen D. (2013). Effects of directness in bad-news e-mails and voice mails. Journal of Business C…
  19. Jovic M. Mnasri S. (2024). Evaluating AI-generated emails: A comparative efficiency analysis. World Journal o…
  20. Knoth N. Tolzin A. Janson A. Leimeister J. M. (2024). AI literacy and its implications for prompt engineering…
  21. Köbis N. Mossink L. D. (2021). Artificial intelligence versus Maya Angelou: Experimental evidence that people…
  22. Nguyen H. Miller J. (2012). Exploring business request genres: Students’ rhetorical choices. Business Communi…
  23. Park S. Jeon J. Shim E. (2021). Exploring request emails in English for business purposes: A move analysis. E…
  24. Pinto Dos Santos V. B. M. (2002). Genre analysis of business letters of negotiation. English for Specific Pur…
  25. Rudolph J. Tan S. Tan S. (2023). ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher edu…
  26. Samraj B. (2014). Move structure. In Schneider K. P. Barron A. (Eds.) Pragmatics of discourse (pp. 385–406). …
  27. Shelby A. N. Reinsch N. L. (1995). Positive emphasis and you-attitude: An empirical study. International Jour…
  28. 10.1017/CBO9781139524827
  29. 10.1177/1461445609341006
  30. Vergaro C. (2004). Discourse strategies of Italian and English sales promotion letters. English for Specific …
  31. Ying J. (2020). The importance of the discussion method in the undergraduate business classroom. Humanistic M…
  32. Zhai X. Razali A. B. (2023). Triple method approach to development of a genre-based approach to teaching ESL/…
  33. Zhang Z. (2013). Business English students learning to write for international business: What do internationa…
CrossRef global citation count: 3 View in citation network →