ChatGPT vs Human Writer – What We Experimented & Found?
Published byat April 14th, 2023 , Revised On August 25, 2023
There has been a growing interest recently in artificial intelligence (AI) abilities and their potential to replace human workers in various fields. One of the areas in which AI has shown remarkable progress is in natural language generation, with AI language models such as ChatGPT capable of producing human-like text. This development raises the question of how ChatGPT compares to human writers regarding writing quality, creativity, and overall effectiveness. In this article, we have put forward an experiment to evaluate the differences between the content written by Chatgpt and a human writer.
To compare ChatGPT’s writing abilities with that of a human writer, we conducted an experiment where both ChatGPT and a human writer were asked to write an article on a particular topic. We chose the topic of “How can ChatGPT help content writers” as it is a subject that is relevant to both ChatGPT and human writers.
The requirements were to write an article of 300 words each on the topic. We gave them both a time limit of two hours to complete the task.
Content Generated by ChatGPT
Content Generated by a Human Writer
Evaluation of ChatGPT vs Human Writer
We evaluated the content of both the ChatGPT and the Human writer on the basis of the following factors:
Grammar and Spelling
In terms of grammar and spelling, ChatGPT performed exceptionally well. The article produced by ChatGPT contained no grammatical or spelling errors, while the article produced by the human writer contained minor errors. ChatGPT’s ability to produce error-free text is due to its advanced language model, which has been trained on massive amounts of text data.
Coherence and Clarity
Both ChatGPT and the human writer produced articles that were coherent and clear. While the article produced by ChatGPT was more concise and straightforward, the one written by the Human writer was more clear with lesser use of passive voice.
The human writer outperformed ChatGPT in terms of creativity. The article produced by the human writer contained unique and creative ideas that were not present in the article produced by ChatGPT.
The readability factor of the human-generated content is high because of its proper structure. ChatGPT can also provide structured content but for more words.
Number of Words
Both models produced more than the desired number of words. However, it should be noted that if you prompt ChatGPT for a higher number of words, it is unable to produce the content. For example, in one situation, it was asked to produce an article of 3000 words, and it generated only 900 words. While in another situation, when asked to create 2500 words, it clearly responded that as an AI model, it is unable to produce such a number of words.
The content from the Human writer was also original. When checked for plagiarism, the article produced by ChatGPT was minorly plagiarised.
Accuracy and Depth
Both ChatGPT and the human writer produced accurate and in-depth articles. However, the article produced by the human writer had more depth and presented more detailed information than the one produced by ChatGPT. The human writer’s ability to produce detailed and accurate information is due to their ability to conduct research and analyse information independently.
ChatGPT’s article was free of cost, while we had to pay the human writer for the article. The cost increases as you hire a more professional writer.
ChatGPT and the human writer both produced articles that effectively conveyed the topic. However, the article written by the human writer was more engaging and thought-provoking, while ChatGPT’s article was more informative and concise. The human writer’s ability to engage and provoke thought is due to their ability to use language creatively and emotionally.
Our experiment shows that ChatGPT can produce high-quality text that is free of grammatical and spelling errors and is clear and coherent. However, it still falls short regarding creativity and originality as it relies on pre-existing patterns in the text it has been trained on. Additionally, while ChatGPT can present accurate information, it may lack depth as it can not conduct research or analyse information independently. Moreover, it cannot produce the latest content as it depends on the trained data.
On the other hand, the human writer excelled in creativity, originality, and presenting detailed information. They were able to engage readers on an emotional level and provoke thought. They can also write as many words as you want them to. However, human writers are not infallible; their text may contain errors, and they may experience writer’s block or burnout, which could affect their writing abilities.
The experiment demonstrates that ChatGPT and human writers have unique strengths and limitations. ChatGPT is useful for quickly generating informative and concise content, while human writers excel in producing engaging and thought-provoking text with a personal touch.
One possible solution to leverage the strengths of both ChatGPT and human writers is to use a hybrid approach where the AI generates initial text, and the human writer can review and edit it, adding their personal touch and creativity. This hybrid approach could lead to better and more effective content creation.
While ChatGPT is an impressive tool that has the potential to revolutionise the field of content creation, it is still not a perfect substitute for human writers. The best approach would be to leverage the strengths of both ChatGPT and human writers to create high-quality content that engages, informs, and inspires readers.
Frequently Asked Questions
ChatGPT gets its data through a two-step process: pre-training and fine-tuning. Pre-training involves exposure to a wide range of internet text, while fine-tuning narrows it down using human-reviewed prompts. The model doesn’t know specifics about which documents were in its training set.