ChatGPT is a new resource and citation standards are not yet available from sources such as APA, CSE, MLA, etc. This page will collect suggestions for how to cite ChatGPT resources until the standards are available.
Organizations/Publishers included in this guide: APA - arXiv - IEEE - JAMA Network - MLA - Nature - OpenAI - Science - Taylor & Francis
Note regarding false citations: A UCSB librarian tested ChatGPT for finding citations. While it gave her citations on her topic they were all fake. Another UC librarian stated, "It gave me some great citations -- except they're all made up! Real scholars, real journals, but articles that don't exist, and mostly the authors don't even work on this topic." See also the blog post, "Did ChatGPT Just Lie to Me?"
OpenAI, the company that produces ChatGPT has its own standards for use:
This sharing and publications policy covers:
Link: http:// https://openai.com/api/policies/sharing-publication/
Date: November 14, 2022
In an email an APA style expert said:
The APA Style team is currently collecting feedback about citing, quoting, and using ChatGPT and fielding related questions about large language models so that we can construct official guidelines about how to document their usage. What follows is some interim guidance in response to your question, but it should not be considered the final word. Please keep an eye on the APA Style website and the APA Style Blog for a more definitive and detailed update and guidelines on this topic.
Because the purpose of references is to direct readers to the specific sources that a writer used, hopefully the text that can be saved, is shareable, or is otherwise retrievable. If so, the reference format in Section 10.10 (Software) can be used, with the company (“ ”) as author, not “ .” If the chat has no title, a description in square brackets (that ideally includes information on what prompts were used) would be created. That would give us the following: generates in any
. (2023, January 17). [ChatGPT response to a prompt about three prominent themes in Emily Dickinson’s poetry]. https://chat.openai.
f that generates is not retrievable or sharable, then it into our catch-all “personal communication” category, where you cite with an in-text only citation: “( , personal communication, January 16, 2023).” However, this is not an entirely satisfactory option, especially because the technology is so new, so both students and instructors are learning about this resource and how to ethically use it. Consider, then, making the ChatGPT conversation retrievable by including the text as an appendix or as online supplemental material. If you do so, then readers may be referred to the appendix or the online supplemental material (where the ChatGPT response may be contextualized) when the ChatGPT conversation is cited. It would be good practice to describe, in the narrative or a note, the prompt that generated the specific ChatGPT response. This too will help inform the understanding of the technology and its outputs.
If you have further insights or comments that you would like to be considered by the APA Style team as it works on its ChatGPT guidance, you may send those comments to this email address or participate in the Twitter thread.
Date: January 25, 2023
arXiv states their policy for Authors' Use of Generative AI Language Tools:
Date: January 31, 2023
In a personal email, an IEEE representative said:
Date: January 26, 2023
JAMA Network has policies relating to non-human authors and:
Their guide also states that the JAMA Network journals have policies for reporting use of statistical analysis software.
Date: January 31, 2023
An article in Nature offers guidance:
The submission guidelines for Nature (available at https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00191-1) include this:
Date: January 24, 2023
In an editorial, the editor of science stated:
Date: January 27, 2023
Taylor & Francis has clarified that:
AI tools must not be listed as an author. Authors must, however, acknowledge all sources and contributors included in their work. Where AI tools are used, such use must be acknowledged and documented appropriately.
Librarians discussing this issue have suggested:
This article in Nature discusses the issue:
ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove. (January 18, 2023) https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00107-z
The article states "Publishers and preprint servers contacted by Nature’s news team agree that AIs such as ChatGPT do not fulfil the criteria for a study author, because they cannot take responsibility for the content and integrity of scientific papers. But some publishers say that an AI’s contribution to writing papers can be acknowledged in sections other than the author list."