1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Journal of English for Research Publication Purposes
  4. Volume 6, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 6, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2590-0994
  • E-ISSN: 2590-1001
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article introduces the “dialogic triad,” a model that redefines human-AI collaboration in scholarly writing by integrating relational agency and Bakhtinian dialogism. Through a case study involving two scholars and multiple GenAI systems, we demonstrate how AI serves as an active co-creator, provoking critical reflection and epistemic innovation. The study highlights moments of tension, where AI outputs conflict with human expertise, and synergy, where AI’s generative potential catalyzes theoretical breakthroughs. Crucially, our findings emphasize that human oversight remains central to ensuring accuracy, ethical accountability, and epistemic depth in AI-assisted scholarship. The model advocates for iterative, transparent collaboration that leverages AI’s potential while preserving scholarly rigor. Practical strategies, including iterative prompting, staged engagement and dialogic trace documentation, emphasize the need for human authority in framing arguments and validating AI outputs. Ultimately, this work positions human expertise as the essential anchor for meaningful, ethical, and innovative academic co-creation.

© 2025 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.00038.cao
2026-03-12
2026-04-20

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.00038.cao
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bakhtin, M. M.
    (2010) The dialogic imagination: Four Essays. University of Texas Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Bakhtin, M. M., & Brostrom, K.
    (1990) Art and Answerability: Early Philosophical Essays (M. Holquist & V. Liapunov, Eds.). University of Texas Press. 10.7560/704114‑002
     https://doi.org/10.7560/704114-002 [Google Scholar]
  3. Barad, K. M.
    (2007) Meeting the Universe halfway: Quantum Physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. 10.2307/j.ctv12101zq
     https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv12101zq [Google Scholar]
  4. Bhavsar, D., Duffy, L., Jo, H., Lokker, C., Haynes, R. B., Iorio, A., Marusic, A., & Ng, J. Y.
    (2025) Policies on artificial intelligence chatbots among academic publishers: a cross-sectional audit. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 10(1). 10.1186/s41073‑025‑00158‑y
     https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-025-00158-y [Google Scholar]
  5. Birhane, A.
    (2021) Algorithmic injustice: A relational ethics approach. Patterns, 2(2), 100205. 10.1016/j.patter.2021.100205
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2021.100205 [Google Scholar]
  6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V.
    (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
     https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar]
  7. Cao, L., & Lin, A. M. Y.
    (2025) AI and Human Languaging: A Critical Framework for English Language Education in Hong Kong. Paper presented at theAHKLC Symposium 2025, Hong Kong, China.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Chelli, M., Descamps, J., Lavoué, V., Trojani, C., Azar, M., Deckert, M., Raynier, J., Clowez, G., Boileau, P., & Ruetsch-Chelli, C.
    (2024) Hallucination Rates and reference Accuracy of CHATGPT and BARD for Systematic Reviews: Comparative analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 261, e53164. 10.2196/53164
     https://doi.org/10.2196/53164 [Google Scholar]
  9. Cohen, J. F., & Moher, D.
    (2025) Generative artificial intelligence and academic writing: friend or foe?Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1791, 111646. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111646
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111646 [Google Scholar]
  10. Curran, N. M., Gu, B., Zhen, L., & Jenks, C.
    (2025) AI and Native Speakerism: The Intersections of Technology, Language Assessment, and Linguistic Objectivity. RELC Journal, 10.1177/00336882251367459
     https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882251367459 [Google Scholar]
  11. Curtis, N.
    (2023) To ChatGPT or not to ChatGPT? The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Academic Publishing. The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal, 42(4), 275. 10.1097/INF.0000000000003852
     https://doi.org/10.1097/INF.0000000000003852 [Google Scholar]
  12. Dwivedi, Y. K., Malik, T., Hughes, L., & Albashrawi, M. A.
    (2024) Scholarly Discourse on GENAI’s Impact on Academic Publishing. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 1–16. 10.1080/08874417.2024.2435386
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2024.2435386 [Google Scholar]
  13. Gibson, J. J.
    (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton, Mifflin and Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Giddens, A.
    (1984) The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Graesser, A. C., Lu, S., Jackson, G. T., Mitchell, H. H., Ventura, M., Olney, A., & Louwerse, M. M.
    (2004) AutoTutor: A tutor with dialogue in natural language. Behavior Research Methods Instruments &Amp Computers, 36(2), 180–192. 10.3758/BF03195563
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195563 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gumperz, J. J.
    (1992) Contextualization revisited. InPragmatics & beyond. New series (p.39). 10.1075/pbns.22.04gum
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.22.04gum [Google Scholar]
  17. (1999) On interactional sociolinguistic method. InDe Gruyter eBooks (pp. 453–472). 10.1515/9783110208375.4.453
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110208375.4.453 [Google Scholar]
  18. Harari, Y. N.
    (2024) Nexus: A Brief History of Information Networks from the Stone Age to AI. Random House.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Hosseini, M., Rasmussen, L. M., & Resnik, D. B.
    (2023) Using AI to write scholarly publications. Accountability in Research, 31(7), 715–723. 10.1080/08989621.2023.2168535
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2168535 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hutchins, E.
    (1995) Cognition in the wild. MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/1881.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1881.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hyland, K.
    (2004) Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. University of Michigan Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Kacena, M. A., Plotkin, L. I., & Fehrenbacher, J. C.
    (2024) The use of artificial intelligence in writing scientific review articles. Current Osteoporosis Reports, 22(1), 115–121. 10.1007/s11914‑023‑00852‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11914-023-00852-0 [Google Scholar]
  23. Khalifa, M., & Albadawy, M.
    (2024) Using artificial intelligence in academic writing and research: An essential productivity tool. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine Update, 51, 100145. 10.1016/j.cmpbup.2024.100145
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpbup.2024.100145 [Google Scholar]
  24. Latour, B.
    (2017) On Actor-Network Theory. A few clarifications, plus more than a few complications. Philosophical Literary Journal Logos, 27(1), 173–197. 10.22394/0869‑5377‑2017‑1‑173‑197
     https://doi.org/10.22394/0869-5377-2017-1-173-197 [Google Scholar]
  25. Li, H., & Wu, X.
    (2025) The use of generative AI tools in academic writing: a systematic review of research trends and thematic insights. AI Ethics, 51, 5821–5840. 10.1007/s43681‑025‑00827‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-025-00827-0 [Google Scholar]
  26. Martin, J. R., & Rose, D.
    (2008) Genre relations: Mapping culture. Equinox Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Matusov, E., Gpt, C., Smith, M. P., & Shugurova, O.
    (2024) Does ChatGPT4 have a dialogical self?: A Bakhtinian perspective. Culture & Psychology, 30(4), 841–870. 10.1177/1354067X231219454
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X231219454 [Google Scholar]
  28. Mohamed, S., Png, M. T., & Isaac, W.
    (2020) Decolonial AI: Decolonial theory as sociotechnical foresight in artificial intelligence. Philosophy & Technology, 331, 659–684. 10.1007/s13347‑020‑00405‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00405-8 [Google Scholar]
  29. Moorhouse, B. L., Wan, Y., Wu, C., Wu, M., & Ho, T. Y.
    (2025) Generative AI tools and empowerment in L2 academic writing. System, 1331, 103779. 10.1016/j.system.2025.103779
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103779 [Google Scholar]
  30. Nguyen, A., Hong, Y., Dang, B., & Huang, X.
    (2024) Human-AI collaboration patterns in AI-assisted academic writing. Studies in Higher Education, 49(5), 847–864. 10.1080/03075079.2024.2323593
     https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2323593 [Google Scholar]
  31. Pickering, A.
    (1995) The mangle of practice: time, agency, and science. Contemporary Sociology a Journal of Reviews, 25(6), 809. 10.7208/9780226668253
     https://doi.org/10.7208/9780226668253 [Google Scholar]
  32. Russell, S., & Norvig, P.
    (2021) Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, Global Edition. Pearson Higher Ed.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Schneider, B.
    (2022) Multilingualism and AI: The Regimentation of Language in the age of Digital Capitalism. Signs and Society, 10(3), 362–387. 10.1086/721757
     https://doi.org/10.1086/721757 [Google Scholar]
  34. Searle, J. R.
    (1980) The intentionality of intention and action*. Cognitive Science, 4(1), 47–70. 10.1207/s15516709cog0401_3
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0401_3 [Google Scholar]
  35. Suchman, L. A.
    (2007) Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Swales, J. M.
    (1990) Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Swanepoel, D.
    (2021) Does artificial intelligence have agency?InStudies in brain and mind (pp. 83–104). 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑72644‑7_4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72644-7_4 [Google Scholar]
  38. Swanepoel, D., & Corks, D.
    (2024) Artificial Intelligence and Agency: Tie-breaking in AI Decision-Making. Science and Engineering Ethics, 30(2). 10.1007/s11948‑024‑00476‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-024-00476-2 [Google Scholar]
  39. Tang, K. S., & Putra, G. B. S.
    (2025) Generative AI as a Dialogic Partner: Enhancing Multiple Perspectives, Reasoning, and Argumentation in Science Education with Customized Chatbots. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 10.1007/s10956‑025‑10240‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-025-10240-1 [Google Scholar]
  40. Tavares, V.
    (2025) Disembodied texts: the politics of embodiment, epistemic mimicry and artificial intelligence in multicultural, minoritized writing. Pedagogy Culture and Society, 1–20. 10.1080/14681366.2025.2585887
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2025.2585887 [Google Scholar]
  41. Thibault, P. J.
    (2011) First-Order Languaging Dynamics and Second-Order Language: the Distributed Language View. Ecological Psychology, 23(3), 210–245. 10.1080/10407413.2011.591274
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2011.591274 [Google Scholar]
  42. (2020) Distributed Languaging, Affective Dynamics, and The Human Ecology Volume II. 10.4324/9781003104551
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003104551 [Google Scholar]
  43. Wise, B., Emerson, L., Van Luyn, A., Dyson, B., Bjork, C., & Thomas, S. E.
    (2024) A scholarly dialogue: writing scholarship, authorship, academic integrity and the challenges of AI. Higher Education Research & Development, 43(3), 578–590. 10.1080/07294360.2023.2280195
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2023.2280195 [Google Scholar]
  44. Wiwanitmkit, S., & Wiwanitkit, V.
    (2024) Artificial intelligence, academic publishing, scientific writing, peer review, and ethics. Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery, 39(4). 10.21470/1678‑9741‑2023‑0377
     https://doi.org/10.21470/1678-9741-2023-0377 [Google Scholar]
  45. Wu, M., Liu, W., Yanyun, Wang, & Yao, M. Z.
    (2024) Negotiating the Shared Agency between Humans & AI in the Recommender System. arXiv (Cornell University). 10.48550/arxiv.2403.15919
     https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2403.15919 [Google Scholar]
  46. Zhang, A. & Varshney, L. R.
    (2025) Conceptualizing agency: A framework for human-AI interaction. InHAI-GEN 2025: 6th Workshop on Human-AI Co-Creation with Generative Models.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Zhao, X., Chen, X., & Cox, A.
    (2025) Exploring the affordances of generative AI in academic writing for students with disabilities: A bottom-up approach to inform GenAI policies. Policy Futures in Education. 10.1177/14782103251395436
     https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103251395436 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.00038.cao
Loading
Dialogic triad
Journal of English for Research Publication Purposes 6, 340 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1075/jerpp.00038.cao
/content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.00038.cao
/content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.00038.cao
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): dialogic triad; generative AI; human-AI collaboration; relational agency; scholarly writing

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error