Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates authorship calibration, defined as users' awareness of their own contributions when interacting with Generative AI systems. By analyzing the CoAuthor dataset, the authors find that heavy AI users often misjudge their level of authorship, while infrequent users demonstrate more accurate self-assessment. These findings highlight the potential for AI to obscure users' perceptions of their contributions, which could negatively impact learning and metacognitive strategies in educational contexts.
Heavy reliance on AI can lead to significant misjudgment of authorship, raising concerns about the integrity of user contributions and learning outcomes.
The broad adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI), especially Generative AI, raises pressing questions about how users interact with these systems to produce new content. In this paper, we introduce the concept of authorship calibration, defined as users awareness of their actual authorship when interacting with AI. Using the CoAuthor dataset, we empirically examine how authorship calibration varies across users and how it relates to their frequency of AI use. Our results reveal high variability: users relying heavily on AI tend to misjudge their authorship, whereas those using AI less frequently exhibit more accurate authorship calibration. These findings suggest that AI can obscure users perception of their own authorship. In learning contexts, miscalibration can affect metacognitive monitoring and learning strategies, ultimately impacting learning outcomes. Fostering authorship calibration then appears essential for promoting responsible and educationally meaningful AI integration.