“If I use an AI tool to research or create something, do I need to cite it as a source in my finished work? How do I properly attribute it when I use an AI tool? ?”
—Quote Seeker
Dear Quote,
The straightforward answer is that if you are using generative AI for research purposes, disclosure is probably not required. However, if you configure it using ChatGPT or another AI tool, attribution is probably required.
When you feel ethically conflicted about disclosing your interactions with AI software, ask yourself two guiding questions: Have you used AI in your research or composition? And might the recipient feel misled if it becomes clear that this AI-assisted composition tool is synthetic rather than organic? Although the question does not perfectly cover all situations, and scholars are undoubtedly held to high standards when it comes to appropriate citations, the 5 I fully believe that with some time and thought, you can figure out proper usage and avoid unnecessary headaches.
Distinguishing between research and composition is an important first step. If you’re using generative AI as a sort of unreliable encyclopedia where you can refer to other sources or expand your perspective on a topic, but not as part of your actual writing. , I think that would be less problematic and less likely to leave a smell of deception. . Always double-check the facts you come across in your chatbot’s output, and never refer to ChatGPT output or Perplexity pages as your primary source of truth. Most chatbots can link to external sources on the web, so you can click to read more. In this context, think of it as part of your information infrastructure. ChatGPT can be the road you drive on, but the final destination must be an external link.
Let’s say you decide to use a chatbot to sketch out your first draft, or let it create text, images, audio, and video to blend with your draft. In this case, I think it would be wise for the disclosing party to make the wrong decision. Domino’s Cheese Sticks in the Uber Eats app now also include a disclaimer that the food description is generated by AI and may contain inaccurate ingredients.
Whenever we use AI for creation, or even research, we need to focus on the second question. Essentially, ask yourself whether your readers or viewers would feel cheated if they later learned that part of what they experienced was generated by an AI. If so, please be respectful of your audience and explain how you used the tool and provide appropriate attribution. Not only would it be against WIRED’s policy to keep portions of this column private, it would just make for a dry and uninteresting experience for both of us.
You can add context to your use of AI by considering the people who will enjoy your work and your intentions for creating it in the first place. This context will help you get through difficult situations. In most cases, an AI-generated, self-proofed work email will suffice. Still, using generated AI to compose a condolence email after a death is an example of insensitivity, and it has happened. If the person you’re communicating with is looking to connect with you on a personal, emotional level, consider closing the ChatGPT browser tab and pulling out your notepad and pen.
“How can educators teach youth to use AI tools responsibly and ethically? Do the benefits of AI outweigh the threats?”
—Raise your hand
