Do the benefits of learning to write a compare-contrast text transfer to other types of writing task? Analysing the effects of strategy-focused instruction / ¿Es posible transferir el aprendizaje de un texto de comparación-contraste a otro tipo de tareas? Análisis de los efectos de la instrucción estratégica

El programa de Instrucción de la Autorregulación Cognitiva (CSRI) se basa en la instrucción centrada en la estrategia e incluye tres componentes para la mejora del producto textual (enseñanza directa, modelado y práctica entre iguales). Se plantearon como objetivosanalizar si la instrucción con el programa CSRI en un género textual (texto de comparación) conducía a la transferencia espontánea en el producto textual (mejor coherencia, estructura y calidad) en un género no instruido (texto de opinión); y examinar si el orden de los componentes instruccionales presentaba algún efecto. Participaron 126 estudiantes de cuarto de educación primaria que fueron asignados a una de las dos condiciones experimentales en las que se aplicaba el programa CSRI (con diferente secuencia de los componentes instructivos), o a una condición de control en la que se seguía la enseñanza tradicional. Los resultados reflejaron que las dos secuencias de instrucción del programa CSRI mostraban beneficios en la estructura y coherencia del producto textual de los estudiantes en el posttest pero no 8 meses después. Para que los alumnos sean capaces de transferir adecuadamente lo aprendido a géneros textuales no instruidos, necesitan que los profesores les enseñen cómo hacerlo eficazmente.(AU)

Cognitive Self-Regulation Instruction (CSRI) program is a strategy-focused instruction with three instructional components for im-proving students’ writing product (direct teaching, modelling, and peer-practice). The present study aimed to explore whether the CSRI program leads to spontaneous transfer, improving the writing product (in terms of quality, structure, and text coherence) of an uninstructed genre (opinion text); and to examine whether the order in which the instructional compo-nents were implemented had an effect. A total of 126 students in their 4thyear of primary school participated in the study. They were randomly as-signed to one of two experimental conditions which received the CSRI but differed in the order the instructional components were delivered, or to a control condition which followed the traditional teaching approach. Our findings show that both CSRI sequences produced benefits in terms of greater structure and coherence of the writing product in the opinion text at post-test but not 8months after the intervention. In consequence, for students to be able to adequately transfer strategies to uninstructed text genres, they need teachers to teach them how to do it effectively.(AU)

The Revival of Essay-Type Questions in Medical Education: Harnessing Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse and compare the assessment and grading of human-written and machine-written formative essays. STUDY DESIGN: Quasi-experimental, qualitative cross-sectional study. Place and Duration of the Study: Department of Science of Dental Materials, Hamdard College of Medicine & Dentistry, Hamdard University, Karachi, from February to April 2023. METHODOLOGY: Ten short formative essays of final-year dental students were manually assessed and graded. These essays were then graded using ChatGPT version 3.5. The chatbot responses and prompts were recorded and matched with manually graded essays. Qualitative analysis of the chatbot responses was then performed. RESULTS: Four different prompts were given to the artificial intelligence (AI) driven platform of ChatGPT to grade the summative essays. These were the chatbot's initial responses without grading, the chatbot's response to grading against criteria, the chatbot's response to criteria-wise grading, and the chatbot's response to questions for the difference in grading. Based on the results, four innovative ways of using AI and machine learning (ML) have been proposed for medical educators: Automated grading, content analysis, plagiarism detection, and formative assessment. ChatGPT provided a comprehensive report with feedback on writing skills, as opposed to manual grading of essays. CONCLUSION: The chatbot's responses were fascinating and thought-provoking. AI and ML technologies can potentially supplement human grading in the assessment of essays. Medical educators need to embrace AI and ML technology to enhance the standards and quality of medical education, particularly when assessing long and short essay-type questions. Further empirical research and evaluation are needed to confirm their effectiveness. KEY WORDS: Machine learning, Artificial intelligence, Essays, ChatGPT, Formative assessment.

Exploring ChatGPT's abilities in medical article writing and peer review.

AIM: To evaluate the quality of ChatGPT-generated case reports and assess the ability of ChatGPT to peer review medical articles. METHODS: This study was conducted from February to April 2023. First, ChatGPT 3.0 was used to generate 15 case reports, which were then peer-reviewed by expert human reviewers. Second, ChatGPT 4.0 was employed to peer review 15 published short articles. RESULTS: ChatGPT was capable of generating case reports, but these reports exhibited inaccuracies, particularly when it came to referencing. The case reports received mixed ratings from peer reviewers, with 33.3% of professionals recommending rejection. The reports' overall merit score was 4.9±1.8 out of 10. The review capabilities of ChatGPT were weaker than its text generation abilities. The AI as a peer reviewer did not recognize major inconsistencies in articles that had undergone significant content changes. CONCLUSION: While ChatGPT demonstrated proficiency in generating case reports, there were limitations in terms of consistency and accuracy, especially in referencing.

Rapport Building in Written Crisis Services: Qualitative Content Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Building therapeutic relationships and social presence are challenging in digital services and maybe even more difficult in written services. Despite these difficulties, in-person care may not be feasible or accessible in all situations. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to categorize crisis counselors' efforts to build rapport in written conversations by using deidentified conversation transcripts from the text and chat arms of the National Child Abuse Hotline. Using these categories, we identify the common characteristics of successful conversations. We defined success as conversations where help-seekers reported the hotline was a good way to seek help and that they were a lot more hopeful, a lot more informed, a lot more prepared to address the situation, and experiencing less stress, as reported by help-seekers. METHODS: The sample consisted of transcripts from 314 purposely selected conversations from of the 1153 text and chat conversations during July 2020. Hotline users answered a preconversation survey (ie, demographics) and a postconversation survey (ie, their perceptions of the conversation). We used qualitative content analysis to process the conversations. RESULTS: Active listening skills, including asking questions, paraphrasing, reflecting feelings, and interpreting situations, were commonly used by counselors. Validation, unconditional positive regard, and evaluation-based language, such as praise and apologies, were also often used. Compared with less successful conversations, successful conversations tended to include fewer statements that attend to the emotional dynamics. There were qualitative differences in how the counselors applied these approaches. Generally, crisis counselors in positive conversations tended to be more specific and tailor their comments to the situation. CONCLUSIONS: Building therapeutic relationships and social presence are essential to digital interventions involving mental health professionals. Prior research demonstrates that they can be challenging to develop in written conversations. Our work demonstrates characteristics associated with successful conversations that could be adopted in other written help-seeking interventions.

Configurational impact of self-regulated writing strategy, writing anxiety, and perceived writing difficulty on EFL writing performance: an fsQCA approach.

Previous research has indicated that writing performance of foreign/second language (L2) learners is influenced by their utilization of self-regulated writing strategies. Yet, the relationship between various self-regulated strategies and individual characteristics, such as writing anxiety and perceived writing difficulty, has not been sufficiently examined. To bridge this gap, this study classified self-regulated writing strategies into four distinct types: cognitive, metacognitive, social behavioral, and motivational. These types were combined with L2 learners' writing anxiety and writing difficulty to form conceptual models to predict high or low writing performance. Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) was used to gain a detailed understanding of the causal intricacies of writing performance. Data was collected from a sample of 94 students attending a university in eastern China. fsQCA revealed a variety of configurations associated with EFL writing performance, with six of them leading to high performance and four to low performance. These configurations highlight the complex causal relationship between students' use of self-regulated writing strategies and their writing performance, while considering their writing anxiety and perceived writing difficulty. The study provided theoretical and practical implications for L2 teachers and educators who wish to enhance L2 learners' writing performance.

Efficacy of two brief trauma-focussed writing interventions in comparison to positive experiences writing: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is emerging literature regarding the efficacy of trauma-focussed writing therapies (TF-WTs) for posttraumatic stress. Such therapies have the potential to reduce posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) in a brief time frame and can be delivered remotely. There remains a need for further research assessing the efficacy of different types of TF-WTs, as well comparing them to alternative control conditions not previously assessed. The present study assessed two TF-WTs that had differing writing instructions in comparison to an intervention that involved writing about positive experiences. METHODS: Adult community participants (n = 83) with subthreshold or clinical PTSD symptoms were randomized to one of three conditions (two of which involved trauma-focussed writing, and the other involved writing about positive experiences). All conditions involved three weekly telehealth-delivered writing appointments. Outcomes were measured using the PTSD Checklist (PCL-5) and the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales (DASS-21), and were evaluated at baseline, one-week post-intervention, and five-weeks post-intervention. This trial was registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR Protocol 12620001065987). RESULTS: There was no evidence that the two TF-WTs were more efficacious in reducing PTSS or producing clinically meaningful change in comparison to positive experiences writing. Instead, a significant reduction from baseline to follow-up in PTSS, depression, anxiety and stress was observed in all three conditions. LIMITATIONS: The results should be interpreted with consideration of the modest sample size and absence of longer-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Three-session trauma-focussed writing delivered via telehealth may not be superior to writing about positive experiences.

Young Girl with Right Arm Cramps while Writing.

A 15-year-old girl arrived with her father. She reported experiencing discomfort and cramps in her right arm while writing for the past 3 months. Her father had observed a palpable lump medially in her right mid-arm. She mentioned variations in the size of the lump on occasion. She denied experiencing any notable pain in the lump.

Activating argumentation schema to write argumentatively and tactfully.

To argue tactfully is a goal in argumentative writing, which entails balanced argumentation schema. Although computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) has been widely acknowledged as language learning mediation, especially in writing, few studies investigate its effectiveness in activating the balanced argumentation schema. This study explores the effectiveness of QQ group discussion, a kind of CSCL mediation most popular in China, in argumentative writing by means of quasi-experiment and interview. Fifty-six second-year college students in an English Department participated in this study. The experimental group were asked to have a pre-writing QQ group discussion on a disputable topic while the control group had an in-class face-to-face discussion (a regular teaching method for English majors). Content analysis of the essays was made to investigate the use of Counterargument elements, Qualifier and Concession. The results show that the two groups had no difference in the use of Counterargument-claim and Rebuttal. However, the experimental group surpassed the control group in Counterargument-data, Concession and Qualifier, which signifies more argumentativeness and tactfulness. In the delayed post-test this group still performed better. The interview transcriptions were coded and analyzed by inductive content analysis with the functions of QQ discussion as the themes. The result not only supported that of the experiment, but also revealed why and how QQ mediation could help activate the balanced argumentation schema. It is suggested that CSCL mediation should be promoted in argumentative writing instruction so that the students could write argumentatively and tactfully.

Granting access: Development of a formal course to demystify and promote predoctoral fellowship applications for graduate students.

Strong scientific writing skills are the foundation of a successful research career and require training and practice. Although these skills are critical for completing a PhD, most students receive little formal writing instruction prior to joining a graduate program. In 2015, the University of Iowa Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP) addressed this issue by developing the scientific writing course Grant Writing Basics (GWB). Here we describe the structure of this course and its effectiveness. GWB is an interactive, workshop-based course that uses a National Institutes of Health (NIH) F30 predoctoral fellowship proposal as a platform for building writing expertise. GWB incorporates established pedagogical principles of adult learning, including flipped classrooms, peer teaching, and reiterative evaluation. Time spent in class centers on active student analysis of previously submitted fellowship applications, discussion of writing resources, active writing, facilitated small group discussion of critiques of student writing samples, revision, and a discussion with a panel of experienced study section members and a student who completed a fellowship submission. Outcomes of GWB include a substantial increase in the number of applications submitted and fellowships awarded. Rigorous evaluation provides evidence that learning objectives were met and that students gained confidence in both their scientific writing skills and their ability to give constructive feedback. Our findings show that investment in formal training in written scientific communication provides a foundation for good writing habits, and the knowledge and skills needed to succeed in this vital aspect of a scientific research career. Furthermore, they highlight that evaluation is valuable in guiding course evolution. Strategies embedded in GWB can be adapted for use in any graduate program to advance scientific writing skills among its trainees.

Could coping with your inner critic be the key to unlocking your scholarly writing?

INTRODUCTION: Though various barriers to productive writing habits exist in academia, scholarship is a critical part of faculty expectations. One barrier that has not been well addressed in the literature is the presence and interference of a negative inner critic, an internal voice or dialogue that criticizes work, halts creativity, and paralyzes writing. COMMENTARY: The purpose of this commentary is to describe the limited evidence-base and anecdotal strategies shown to support increased writing productivity by acknowledging and navigating the inner critic. With strategies such as proper identification, acknowledgment, strong mentor-mentee relationships, personifying the inner critic, embracing a growth mindset, and considering the distinct phases of writing, faculty can cope with their critical inner voice and reclaim control of their scholarly writing productivity. IMPLICATIONS: With such a heavy emphasis on writing productivity for faculty, faculty are encouraged to more formally explore and implement professional development strategies to help navigate their inner critic and bolster writing productivity.

Good reasons for bad behavior: a randomized controlled experiment on the impact of narrative reading and writing on empathic concern, perspective-taking, and attitude.

Background: Empathic concern and perspective-taking may contribute to avoiding stigmatization of adverse health behavior. Narrative writing has been shown to be effective in promoting perspective-taking and empathy. But since narrative writing is time consuming, we tested in the present study narrative reading as an alternative, more parsimonious approach. Methods: In a randomized controlled experiment, we compared writing a narrative text about a fictitious person who displays disapproved of health behavior to reading such a text and to a control condition in which participants wrote about an unrelated topic. With a sample of n = 194 participants, we investigated the impact of writing and reading a narrative text on promoting empathic concern and perspective-taking as well as on attitude change. Results: We found that both writing and reading a narrative text about the fictitious character increased empathic concern, F(1, 191) = 32.85, p < 0.001, part. η2 = 0.15, and perspective-taking, F(1, 191) = 24.76, p < 0.001, part. η2 = 0.12, more strongly than writing about an unrelated topic. Writing and reading a narrative text also resulted in a more positive attitude toward this person, F(1, 191) = 17.63, p < 0.001, part. η2 = 0.08. Simply reading a narrative text was equally efficient as narrative writing with respect to empathic concern, p = 0.581, perspective-taking, p = 0.629, and attitude, p = 0.197. Conclusion: The finding that narrative reading is as effective as narrative writing suggests that the readers appear to be able to comprehend and engage with the story being told. When narrative reading is as effective as narrative writing, it can succeed with reduced effort in increasing empathic concern, perspective-taking, and attitude. We discuss the benefits of this approach for reducing stigmatization of adverse health behavior.

Association of reviewer experience with discriminating human-written versus ChatGPT-written abstracts.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if reviewer experience impacts the ability to discriminate between human-written and ChatGPT-written abstracts. METHODS: Thirty reviewers (10 seniors, 10 juniors, and 10 residents) were asked to differentiate between 10 ChatGPT-written and 10 human-written (fabricated) abstracts. For the study, 10 gynecologic oncology abstracts were fabricated by the authors. For each human-written abstract we generated a ChatGPT matching abstract by using the same title and the fabricated results of each of the human generated abstracts. A web-based questionnaire was used to gather demographic data and to record the reviewers' evaluation of the 20 abstracts. Comparative statistics and multivariable regression were used to identify factors associated with a higher correct identification rate. RESULTS: The 30 reviewers discriminated 20 abstracts, giving a total of 600 abstract evaluations. The reviewers were able to correctly identify 300/600 (50%) of the abstracts: 139/300 (46.3%) of the ChatGPT-generated abstracts and 161/300 (53.7%) of the human-written abstracts (p=0.07). Human-written abstracts had a higher rate of correct identification (median (IQR) 56.7% (49.2-64.1%) vs 45.0% (43.2-48.3%), p=0.023). Senior reviewers had a higher correct identification rate (60%) than junior reviewers and residents (45% each; p=0.043 and p=0.002, respectively). In a linear regression model including the experience level of the reviewers, familiarity with artificial intelligence (AI) and the country in which the majority of medical training was achieved (English speaking vs non-English speaking), the experience of the reviewer (ß=10.2 (95% CI 1.8 to 18.7)) and familiarity with AI (ß=7.78 (95% CI 0.6 to 15.0)) were independently associated with the correct identification rate (p=0.019 and p=0.035, respectively). In a correlation analysis the number of publications by the reviewer was positively correlated with the correct identification rate (r28)=0.61, p<0.001. CONCLUSION: A total of 46.3% of abstracts written by ChatGPT were detected by reviewers. The correct identification rate increased with reviewer and publication experience.

Expanding capacity for publication in nursing: Experiences from a writing for publication group.

Nurses have valuable knowledge and expertise to share. Yet, for a variety of reasons, many nurses do not write for publication. Members in one Sigma Theta Tau International chapter requested information about publishing so a writing for publication program (WPP) was convened. Ten nurses from diverse clinical and academic backgrounds participated. The goal of the WPP was to support a small group of nurses to advance knowledge and develop practical skills through the development of a manuscript with mentorship from doctorally-prepared nurses with publishing experience. The anticipated effect was that participants would share what they learned with colleagues or mentor others to publish in the future. Beginning with informational sessions to lay the foundation for writing and publishing, the WPP included biweekly, two-hour online sessions over a seven-month period whereby individual and group writing with embedded peer and WPP leader feedback occurred. WPP participants gained proficiency in searching online databases, synthesizing published literature, and working as a member of a writing team. The group successfully published a manuscript based on a topic of interest. This current article describes the structured support and mentorship provided during the WPP with recommendations for overcoming publication barriers commonly described in the literature.

Historia de la escritura como herramienta para la práctica de la psiquiatría y la salud mental.

La escritura como la conocemos hoy en día es un desarrollo relativamente nuevo en la historia cultural de la humanidad. Más actual aún es la masividad de la alfabetización de la población. Desde los orígenes de la psiquiatría, la escritura forma parte inherente de ésta en la bibliografía médica pero también como una herramienta aplicada en la práctica en diversos formatos, tanto con fines diagnósticos como terapéuticos. No obstante, frente a las herramientas clásicas de comunicación, como el habla, y en la psiquiatría infantil, también el juego y el dibujo, la escritura parece haber sido relegada. En esta investigación bibliográfica, que no tendría antecedentes en su tipo, se realizó un recorrido histórico de la temática desde el surgimiento de la psiquiatría como especialidad hasta nuestros días; donde hechos como las Guerras Mundiales, la evolución del concepto de discapacidad o la pandemia por COVID-19 parecen haber jugado un papel clave para delimitar variables que caracterizan, al menos, tres períodos históricos y presumir un cuarto en plena gestación. El soporte tecnológico con el que se escribe y el uso y formato dado a la escritura resultaron las principales variables de los distintos períodos. Siendo ésta una época de muy alta demanda en Salud Mental, desafiante en su accesibilidad y la masividad en el uso de la escritura a partir de tecnologías de la información, esta investigación representaría un aporte significativo al desarrollo de la escritura como herramienta para la práctica de la psiquiatría y la salud mental.