Home > HCAS > HCAS_PUBS > HCAS_JOURNALS > TQR Home > TQR > Vol. 29 > No. 10 (2024)
Abstract
Digital research workflows are study designs that intentionally consider the use of technology in meaningful and reflexive ways. While most scholars use digital tools and spaces in their research process, doing so has consequences that are infrequently considered in an intentional way. Especially in this age of generative AI, technology integration into research studies will have an even greater impact and consequences on study outcomes. This paper documents one digital research workflow, the academic writing process, to demonstrate how inviting generative AI to be a writing partner can be done in a reflexive manner. Drawing on Paulus and Lester’s (2023) technological reflexivity framework, we emphasize the need to assess the use and impact of platforms such as ChatGPT on four dimensions of the academic writing workflow: writing methods, writers and their audience, writing outcomes, and the generative AI platform itself. We structure this use case according to Woolf and Silver’s (2018) notions of “strategies” and “tactics,” applied to the academic writing process, combined with Paulus and Lester’s four consequence categories. We include recommendations for navigating and using generative artificial intelligence in future academic writing endeavors.
Keywords
Generative artificial intelligence (AI), digital workflow, academic writing, Chat GPT, technological reflexivity
Publication Date
12-1-2024
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License.
DOI
10.46743/2160-3715/2024.7634
Recommended APA Citation
Johnson, C. W., & Paulus, T. (2024). Generating a reflexive AI-assisted workflow for academic writing. The Qualitative Report, 29(10), 2772-2792. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2024.7634
ORCID ID
0000-0002-6918-3787
ResearcherID
0000-0002-0579-1644
Included in
Language and Literacy Education Commons, Other Education Commons, Quantitative, Qualitative, Comparative, and Historical Methodologies Commons