“It Was 80% Me, 20% AI”: Seeking Authenticity in Co-Writing with Large Language Models
Given the rising proliferation and diversity of AI writing assistance tools, especially those powered by large language models (LLMs), both writers and readers may have concerns about the impact of these tools on the authenticity of writing work. We examine whether and how writers want to preserve their authentic voice when co-writing with AI tools and whether personalization of AI writing support could help achieve this goal. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 19 professional writers, during which they co-wrote with both personalized and non-personalized AI writing-support tools. We supplemented writers’ perspectives with opinions from 30 avid readers about the written work co-produced with AI collected through an online survey. Our findings illuminate conceptions of authenticity in human-AI co-creation, which focus more on the process and experience of constructing creators’ authentic selves. While writers reacted positively to personalized AI writing tools, they believed the form of personalization needs to target writers’ growth and go beyond the phase of text production. Overall, readers’ responses showed less concern about human-AI co-writing. Readers could not distinguish AI-assisted work, personalized or not, from writers’ solo-written work and showed positive attitudes toward writers experimenting with new technology for creative writing.
Personalized GPT-4 writing suggestions often aligned more closely with participating writers’ styles and helped some writers develop ideas, maintain their writing flow and reduce the work required to revise mismatched suggestions.
Participating writers worried that AI assistance could weaken creative control, interrupt their established process or reproduce a fixed version of their style rather than support continued experimentation and growth.
Evidence
- Peer-reviewedAngel Hsing-Chi Hwang, Q. Vera Liao, Su Lin Blodgett, Alexandra Olteanu, and Adam Trischler. “It Was 80% Me, 20% AI”: Seeking Authenticity in Co-Writing with Large Language Models. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 9, No. 2, Article CSCW122.2025-04-01archived copy
How should this claim be treated?
Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-0692, v2: ““It Was 80% Me, 20% AI”: Seeking Authenticity in Co-Writing with Large Language Models.” Truvace, 2026-08-08. /record/TRV-2026-0692 (accessed at citation time). sha256 dc5b1b33420d0ed4…
Calibration history
Every change to this record since certification, in the open.
Editorial presentation revision: removed the optional limitation section and simplified the reading label.
Certified as a peer-reviewed Trace on AI-assisted writing and authenticity.
How to verify without trusting this page
Fetch the canonical text of any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-0692 and hash it yourself — for example shasum -a 256 on the saved canonical field. The result must equal content_hash, and each version’s text ends with prev:followed by the prior version’s hash (version 1 chains to 64 zeros). If a single character of any version had been altered since certification, the chain would not reproduce.
ace