Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The paper analyzes the outcomes and usefulness of ChatGPT after being prompted by the user to collect information in the field of arts and humanities. The research questions whether AI methodologies make it easier to find precise sources, or whether the methodologies move us away from the topic we are supposed to know how to precisely communicate. Another question that naturally surfaces is the copyright of the generated text, taken that the tool itself is a storage of already published papers and articles. As such, if we use that information, do we mimic someone else’s work? Materials used in research are forums, academic papers, and ChatGPT results themselves. The research method is based on comparing forum discussions and showing different sides of the ethical usage of ChatGPT. There is a possibility of two different approaches, one confirming copyright infringement, and the other arguing how AI tools are helpful. As we are currently ending the first quarter of the 21st century, learning about the newly emerged AI tools is our obligation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hana Tiro (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: