A Linguistic Comparison between Human and ChatGPT-Generated Conversations


Journal article


Morgan Sandler, Hyesun Choung, Arun Ross, Prabu David
International Conferences on Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, 2024

Semantic Scholar ArXiv DBLP DOI
Cite

Cite

APA   Click to copy
Sandler, M., Choung, H., Ross, A., & David, P. (2024). A Linguistic Comparison between Human and ChatGPT-Generated Conversations. International Conferences on Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence.


Chicago/Turabian   Click to copy
Sandler, Morgan, Hyesun Choung, Arun Ross, and Prabu David. “A Linguistic Comparison between Human and ChatGPT-Generated Conversations.” International Conferences on Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence (2024).


MLA   Click to copy
Sandler, Morgan, et al. “A Linguistic Comparison between Human and ChatGPT-Generated Conversations.” International Conferences on Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, 2024.


BibTeX   Click to copy

@article{morgan2024a,
  title = {A Linguistic Comparison between Human and ChatGPT-Generated Conversations},
  year = {2024},
  journal = {International Conferences on Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence},
  author = {Sandler, Morgan and Choung, Hyesun and Ross, Arun and David, Prabu}
}

Abstract

This study explores linguistic differences between human and LLM-generated dialogues, using 19.5K dialogues generated by ChatGPT-3.5 as a companion to the EmpathicDialogues dataset. The research employs Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) analysis, comparing ChatGPT-generated conversations with human conversations across 118 linguistic categories. Results show greater variability and authenticity in human dialogues, but ChatGPT excels in categories such as social processes, analytical style, cognition, attentional focus, and positive emotional tone, reinforcing recent findings of LLMs being"more human than human."However, no significant difference was found in positive or negative affect between ChatGPT and human dialogues. Classifier analysis of dialogue embeddings indicates implicit coding of the valence of affect despite no explicit mention of affect in the conversations. The research also contributes a novel, companion ChatGPT-generated dataset of conversations between two independent chatbots, which were designed to replicate a corpus of human conversations available for open access and used widely in AI research on language modeling. Our findings enhance understanding of ChatGPT's linguistic capabilities and inform ongoing efforts to distinguish between human and LLM-generated text, which is critical in detecting AI-generated fakes, misinformation, and disinformation.