Perceptions of Professionalism and Authenticity in AI-Assisted Writing

Anthony W. Coman University of Florida ; Peter Cardon

Abstract

This study captured the perspectives of 887 working adults to explore views of professionalism, authenticity, and effectiveness of AI-generated messages. With a 3 (message type) × 2 (disclosed vs. undisclosed) × 2 (ChatGPT-generated vs. Google-generated AI messages) design, professionals generally view AI-generated content favorably in all conditions. Across all messages, professionals consistently rated the AI-generated messages as professional, effective, efficient, confident, and direct. They rate sincerity and caring slightly lower in some disclosed conditions, particularly for ChatGPT-generated messages, suggesting the importance of tool selection when using generative AI for workplace writing. Those professionals who use AI more frequently for work are more likely to view AI-assisted writing as authentic, effective, and confidence-building. Implications for teaching business communication, including the need to address AI literacy, and suggestions for future research are provided.

Journal
Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
Published
2024-03-11
DOI
10.1177/23294906241233224
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (10)

  1. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  2. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  3. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  4. Technical Communication Quarterly
  5. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
Show all 10 →
  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

References (37) · 6 in this index

  1. 10.1177/23294884221126489
  2. 10.1080/08824090409359963
  3. 10.5465/amr.2008.31193163
  4. 10.1177/23294884211025735
  5. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
Show all 37 →
  1. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  2. 10.31235/osf.io/b3ezy
  3. 10.1177/23294884211037009
  4. 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107628
  5. Davenport T. H., Mittal N. (2022). How generative AI is changing creative work. Harvard Business Review. http…
  6. Dell’Acqua F., McFowland E.III, Mollick E., Lifshitz-Assaf H., Kellogg K. C., Rajendran S., Krayer L., Candel…
  7. 10.1145/3544548.3581351
  8. Fu Y., Foell S., Xu X., Hiniker A. (2023). From text to self: Users’ perceptions of potential of AI on interp…
  9. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  10. 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107592
  11. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  12. 10.1093/jcmc/zmz022
  13. 10.1016/j.chb.2019.106190
  14. 10.1038/s41598-023-30938-9
  15. Business English: Its principles and practice
  16. North American Journal of Psychology
  17. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  18. 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.925
  19. Li C., Wang J., Zhang Y., Zhu K., Hou W., Lian J., Luo F., Yang Q., Xie X. (2023). Large language models unde…
  20. 10.1177/1080569913480234
  21. 10.1080/1062726X.2022.2068553
  22. 10.1145/3449091
  23. Mollick E. [@emollick]. (2023, November 15). It is not an exaggeration to say that many (most?) people are ne…
  24. 10.2139/ssrn.4375283
  25. 10.1038/s42256-023-00720-7
  26. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  27. 10.1177/002194369503200401
  28. 10.1177/0893318920979828
  29. 10.1145/3411764.3445557
  30. 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00333.x
  31. 10.1177/009365096023001001
  32. 10.1089/cyber.2020.0863