ArticlePloS one2025
"It is important to consult" a linguist: Verb-Argument Constructions in ChatGPT and human experts' medical and financial advice.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper adopts a Usage-Based Construction Grammar perspective to compare human- and AI-generated language, focusing on Verb-Argument Constructions (VACs) as a lens for analysis. Specifically, we examine solicited advice texts in two domains-Finance and Medicine-produced by humans and ChatGPT across different GPT models (3.5, 4, and 4o) and interfaces (3.5 Web vs. 3.5 API). Our findings reveal broad consistency in the frequency and distribution of the most common VACs across human- and AI-generated texts, though ChatGPT exhibits a slightly higher reliance on the most frequent constructions. A closer examination of the verbs occupying these constructions uncovers significant differences in the meanings conveyed, with a notable growth away from human-like language production in macro level perspectives (e.g., length) and towards humanlike verb-VAC patterns with newer models. These results underscore the potential of VACs as a powerful tool for analyzing AI-generated language and tracking its evolution over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.