This paper explores the potential of large language models (LLMs) as reliable analytical tools in linguistic research, focusing on the emergence of affective meanings in temporal expressions involving manner-of-motion verbs. While LLMs like GPT-4 have shown promise across a range of tasks, their ability to replicate nuanced human judgements remains under scrutiny. We conducted four psycholinguistic studies (on emergent meanings, valence shifts, verb choice in emotional contexts, and sentence-emoji associations) first with human participants and then replicated the same tasks using an LLM. Results across all studies show a striking convergence between human and AI responses, with statistical analyses (e.g., Spearman's rho = .73-.96) indicating strong correlations in both rating patterns and categorical choices. While minor divergences were observed in some cases, these did not alter the overall interpretative outcomes. These findings offer compelling evidence that LLMs can augment traditional human-based experimentation, enabling broader-scale studies without compromising interpretative validity. This convergence not only strengthens the empirical foundation of prior human-based findings but also opens possibilities for hypothesis generation and data expansion through AI. Ultimately, our study supports the use of LLMs as credible and informative collaborators in linguistic inquiry.

The use of generative AI (GAI) among university students is rapidly increasing, yet empirical research on students' GAI use and the factors influencing it remains limited. To address this gap, we surveyed 363 undergraduate and graduate students in the United States, examining their GAI usage and how it relates to demographic variables and personality traits based on the Big Five model (i.e., extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability, and intellect/imagination). Our findings reveal: (a) Students in higher academic years are more inclined to use GAI and prefer it over traditional resources. (b) Non-native English speakers use and adopt GAI more readily than native speakers. (c) Compared to White, Asian students report higher GAI usage, perceive greater academic benefits, and express a stronger preference for it. Similarly, Black students report a more positive impact of GAI on their academic performance. Personality traits also play a significant role in shaping perceptions and usage of GAI. After controlling demographic factors, we found that personality still significantly predicts GAI use and attitudes: (a) Students with higher conscientiousness use GAI less. (b) Students who are higher in agreeableness perceive a less positive impact of GAI on academic performance and express more ethical concerns about using it for academic work. (c) Students with higher emotional stability report a more positive impact of GAI on learning and fewer concerns about its academic use. (d) Students with higher extraversion show a stronger preference for GAI over traditional resources. (e) Students with higher intellect/imagination tend to prefer traditional resources. These insights highlight the need for universities to provide personalized guidance to ensure students use GAI effectively, ethically, and equitably in their academic pursuits.

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at providing information acquired during pretraining on large-scale corpora and following instructions through user prompts. This study investigates whether the quality of LLM responses varies depending on the demographic profile of users. Considering English as the global lingua franca, along with the diversity of its dialects among speakers of different native languages, we explore whether non-native English speakers receive lower-quality or even factually incorrect responses from LLMs more frequently. Our results show that performance discrepancies occur when LLMs are prompted by native versus non-native English speakers and persist when comparing native speakers from Western countries with others. Additionally, we find a strong anchoring effect when the model recognizes or is made aware of the user's nativeness, which further degrades the response quality when interacting with non-native speakers. Our analysis is based on a newly collected dataset with over 12,000 unique annotations from 124 annotators, including information on their native language and English proficiency.

The emergent abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), which power tools like ChatGPT and Bard, have produced both excitement and worry about how AI will impact academic writing. In response to rising concerns about AI use, authors of academic publications may decide to voluntarily disclose any AI tools they use to revise their manuscripts, and journals and conferences could begin mandating disclosure and/or turn to using detection services, as many teachers have done with student writing in class settings. Given these looming possibilities, we investigate whether academics view it as necessary to report AI use in manuscript preparation and how detectors react to the use of AI in academic writing.

As technology constantly advances and focuses on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and virtual assistance, the future of education also goes through numerous changes. It is not only in how we acquire information these days but also in how the tools we use transform the way we study per se. One of the prominent examples is ChatGPT, which has instantly taken things to another level by allowing smart students and educators to use it as a solution for writing and even analytical purposes. As the system bases itself on the information that is being shared, ChatGPT also provides intelligent feedback that helps to remain inspired and have fun with this new generation chatbot! If you have never used intelligent chatbots in the past for educational purposes, the best way to start is ChatGPT.