COMP 3270 / Module 3 / Unit 9 / Lesson 2

Lesson 9.2 · Week 6 · Reading: Chapter 11 & Chapter 6

Human Authorship, Creative Contribution, and Attribution

Distinguish human intellectual and creative contributions from AI tool use. Explain why AI cannot be an accountable author. Prepare an authorship and contribution record with provenance, attribution, acknowledgement, and disclosure.

Estimated study time: 3–4 hours Prerequisite: Lesson 9.1 Module 3 · Week 6

Table of Contents

1. Lesson Overview

This lesson explores what it means to be a human author in the age of generative AI. You will learn to distinguish between human intellectual and creative contributions and the role of AI as a tool. We will examine why AI systems cannot be credited as accountable human authors and how to properly attribute, acknowledge, and document contributions to maintain integrity and responsibility.

You will also learn to identify different contributor roles (author, co-author, editor, reviewer, etc.) and understand the importance of provenance and verification. By the end, you will be able to prepare an authorship and contribution record that clearly separates human from AI involvement, preserving your voice and agency while meeting institutional and professional standards.

This is the second lesson in Unit 9, building on the source-rights foundation from Lesson 9.1 and preparing you for Lesson 9.3 (Plagiarism and Academic Integrity) and Assignment 3.

⚖️ Authorship & integrity reminder: This lesson provides educational guidance on authorship and contribution in AI-assisted work. It does not determine authorship in any specific case; institutional, disciplinary, and professional requirements vary. Always consult the applicable policy.

2. Learning Outcomes

By the end of this lesson, you should be able to:

  1. Define human authorship, contributor roles, originality, responsibility, and provenance.
  2. Distinguish between author, contributor, editor, source, tool, and AI system.
  3. Identify forms of human intellectual, analytical, creative, and editorial contribution in AI-assisted work.
  4. Explain why AI systems cannot be credited as human authors and why they cannot accept accountability.
  5. Differentiate among attribution, acknowledgement, citation, disclosure, and permission.
  6. Evaluate a work to determine whether a human contribution is sufficient to claim authorship.
  7. Develop a provenance record documenting human and AI contributions, verification, and final responsibility.
  8. Apply the CREATE framework elements related to human contribution and authorship.

3. Before You Begin

4. Retrieval Practice

Refresh your memory of key concepts from earlier units that support this lesson.

Question 1: According to the ORBIT framework, what does the “R” stand for, and how does it relate to human authorship?

Show answer and explanation

Answer: In ORBIT, the “R” stands for Responsibility. It reminds us that humans are ultimately responsible for the outputs and decisions involving AI. This directly relates to authorship, as an accountable author must take responsibility for the work.

Reference: Unit 3, ORBIT framework.

Question 2: What is the purpose of the PARTNER framework, and how does it inform the human-AI collaboration dynamic?

Show answer and explanation

Answer: PARTNER is a framework for designing effective human-AI partnerships. It emphasises human oversight, task allocation, and shared goals. It helps clarify which parts of a task are best performed by the human and which by the AI, which is essential for determining authorship and contribution.

Reference: Unit 6, PARTNER framework.

Question 3: How does the FAIRER framework’s “Representation” element connect to authorship and attribution?

Show answer and explanation

Answer: Representation in FAIRER concerns ensuring that diverse perspectives, communities, and rights-holders are fairly represented. In authorship, this means giving proper credit to all contributors and respecting their voices, which is directly relevant to attribution and acknowledgement.

Reference: Unit 7, FAIRER framework.

5. Opening Scenario

📌 Scenario — The AI-Generated Draft

A university student is writing a research paper. The student uses an AI system to generate a first draft by providing a short prompt: “Write a 1500-word essay on the economic impacts of climate change.” The AI produces a well-structured draft with references.

The student makes a few minor edits, changes some wording, and adds a brief introduction and conclusion. The student submits the paper as their own work without mentioning the use of AI.

The student believes that because they “guided” the AI and made edits, they are the sole author.

Questions to consider:

  1. What human contributions are evident in the student’s process?
  2. What AI contributions are evident?
  3. What remains unclear about the student’s contribution?
  4. What disclosure or redesign might be required?
  5. Who can answer questions about the final work and its sources?
Show guided analysis

1. Human contributions: The student provided a prompt (conception of topic), made minor edits, added an introduction and conclusion, and made some wording changes. These are contributions, but they are minimal compared to the AI-generated content.

2. AI contributions: The AI generated the entire body of the essay, including structure, arguments, and references. The AI contributed the vast majority of the expression and content.

3. What remains unclear: The student did not document which parts were AI-generated or verify the accuracy of the references. The student also did not disclose the AI involvement, making it appear as if they were the sole author.

4. Disclosure/redesign: The student should disclose that AI was used to generate a draft and should document the extent of their own revisions. The student might also need to verify the AI-generated content, especially the references, and possibly rewrite sections to demonstrate genuine understanding.

5. Accountability: The student is the only person who can answer questions about the final work, as the AI system cannot accept responsibility. The student must be prepared to defend the content and sources.

Conclusion: The student’s claim of sole authorship is questionable because the AI contribution is substantial. Without disclosure, this may constitute academic dishonesty.

6. Core Content

6.1 Human Authorship

Definition — Human Authorship

Human authorship involves accountable human contributions such as conception, purpose, selection, interpretation, analysis, argument, organisation, original expression, revision, verification, approval, and responsibility.

Authorship is not a single act; it is a constellation of intellectual and creative activities. In academic and professional contexts, authorship carries both credit and responsibility. The person listed as author is expected to have made significant contributions and to be able to defend the work.

Key aspects of human authorship:

  • Conception: Defining the problem, research question, or creative vision.
  • Selection: Choosing sources, materials, or data.
  • Interpretation: Drawing meaning, conclusions, or insights from the material.
  • Analysis: Breaking down complex information and identifying patterns.
  • Argument: Constructing a coherent line of reasoning.
  • Organisation: Structuring the work logically and effectively.
  • Original expression: Writing, composing, or creating in one’s own voice.
  • Revision: Critically reviewing and improving the work.
  • Verification: Fact-checking, validating sources, and ensuring accuracy.
  • Approval: Final sign-off on the content.
  • Responsibility: Willingness to stand behind the work and correct errors.
Key insight: Authorship is not just about who wrote the words; it is about who is accountable for the intellectual content.
Authorship in practice

Example: A researcher designs a study, collects and analyses data, writes the manuscript, and reviews the final version. This person is clearly an author.

Example of minimal contribution: A person who only suggests a topic or reads a draft and provides minor comments may not qualify as an author; they might be acknowledged as a contributor.

6.2 Contributor Roles

In collaborative work, various roles may be distinguished. Understanding these roles helps clarify credit and responsibility.

Table 1. Contributor roles in AI-assisted work
Role Definition Example in AI-Assisted Work
Author Primary creator accountable for the work. The student who designed the research, wrote the manuscript, and verified the AI-generated content.
Co-author Shares responsibility and credit; significant contributions. Collaborators who contributed equally to analysis and writing.
Contributor Provided specific but limited contributions. Someone who helped with data collection but not writing.
Editor Revised and improved language, clarity, or structure. A person who edited the manuscript for grammar and flow.
Reviewer Provided feedback on the work. A peer who reviewed the draft and suggested changes.
Translator Translated the work into another language. AI or human who translated the text.
Illustrator Created visual elements. A designer who created graphs or images.
Source Provided raw material or data. A dataset or interview source.
Tool Instrument used to assist the work. AI system, word processor, statistical software.
AI System Generated text, images, or other content. ChatGPT, DALL-E, etc.
Rights Holder Owns the rights to the work or its components. Publisher, institution, or creator.
Important: An AI system is a tool, not a person. It cannot be a co-author or contributor in the human sense because it cannot accept responsibility or exercise judgment.

6.3 Distinguishing AI from Human Authorship

Generative AI can produce text, images, and other content that resembles human output. However, the AI system does not have intentions, beliefs, or accountability. It generates patterns based on training data, but it does not understand, verify, or take responsibility for its outputs.

Why AI cannot be a human author:

  • AI lacks consciousness, intent, and moral agency.
  • AI cannot explain or defend its outputs.
  • AI cannot verify sources or claims.
  • AI cannot accept consequences for errors or misconduct.
  • AI does not have legal personhood in most jurisdictions.

Therefore, when you use AI, you remain the human author responsible for the final work. The AI is a tool, much like a word processor or a calculator, but with more advanced capabilities.

Misconception: “I told the AI what to do, so I am the sole author.” While you provide direction, the AI generates substantial content. Your role as author depends on the extent of your intellectual contribution and your verification of the output.
When to acknowledge AI assistance

General guideline: If AI contributed significantly to the expression, analysis, or creation of the work, you should acknowledge it. The threshold varies by context.

  • Academic: Many institutions require disclosure of any AI use that goes beyond editing or grammar checking.
  • Professional: Some journals and employers require explicit statements about AI involvement.
  • Creative: In the arts, transparency about AI generation is increasingly expected.

Always check the applicable policy.

6.4 Responsibility and Accountability

Definition — Responsibility

Responsibility means being answerable for the work. An accountable author should be able to:

  • Explain the work and its rationale.
  • Identify and verify sources.
  • Disclose material assistance, including AI use.
  • Respond to criticism and correct errors.
  • Accept consequences for shortcomings or misconduct.
  • Confirm compliance with applicable requirements.

These functions are uniquely human. An AI system cannot perform them. Therefore, any claim of authorship implies that the human author is willing and able to take on these responsibilities.

Critical point: You cannot transfer accountability to an AI system. Even if the AI generated the content, you are responsible for it.
Responsibility example

Scenario: A professional uses an AI to draft a report. The report contains a factual error. Who is responsible?

Answer: The professional is responsible, because they chose to use the AI, they did not verify the output, and they approved the final report. They cannot blame the AI.

6.5 Attribution and Acknowledgement

Attribution identifies the source or creator of a work. In the context of AI, attribution may involve citing sources used by the AI and acknowledging the AI tool itself.

Acknowledgement is a broader concept that includes thanking contributors, funders, and tools. It does not carry the same weight as authorship but is still important for transparency.

Key distinctions:

  • Attribution → Credits human sources and creators.
  • Citation → Scholarly reference to sources.
  • Acknowledgement → Thanks for assistance, including AI use.
  • Disclosure → Formal statement of AI involvement (covered in Lesson 9.4).
  • Permission → Authorisation to use material (covered in Lesson 9.1).

When you use AI, you may need to provide both attribution (to sources the AI used) and acknowledgement (that AI assisted). Do not confuse these with permission.

Guideline: If AI generated content that is similar to a known source, cite that source. Also acknowledge the AI tool if its contribution was significant.
Attribution vs. acknowledgement example

Scenario: You ask an AI to paraphrase a passage from a book. You use the paraphrase in your paper.

  • Attribution: Cite the book as the original source.
  • Acknowledgement: Mention that you used an AI tool to assist with paraphrasing, and specify which tool.

Both are important for integrity.

6.6 Preserving Human Voice and Agency

One concern with AI assistance is that the final work may lose the author’s unique voice and perspective. To preserve your voice:

  • Start with your own ideas before consulting AI.
  • Use AI for inspiration, not for final content.
  • Revise AI output substantially to reflect your own thinking and style.
  • Verify and fact-check everything the AI produces.
  • Infuse your work with personal judgment, examples, and insights that AI cannot generate.

Human agency also means making conscious decisions about what AI to use, how to use it, and how to document that use. You remain in control.

Tip: After using AI, review the output and ask: “Does this sound like me? Does it reflect my understanding?” If not, revise further.

6.7 Provenance and Documentation

Definition — Provenance

Provenance is the record of the creation, modification, and chain of custody of a work. In AI-assisted work, provenance includes:

  • Source inventory: List of all sources used.
  • Permissions: Licences and permissions obtained.
  • Prompt record: The prompts you used with AI.
  • AI output record: The outputs generated.
  • Human revision record: Your edits and changes.
  • Citation record: How you cited sources.
  • Verification record: Steps taken to verify facts and sources.
  • Disclosure statement: Your AI-use declaration.
  • Final approval: Your sign-off.

Maintaining provenance helps you defend your work, answer questions, and demonstrate integrity. It is especially important if there are disputes about authorship or source use.

Do not include confidential prompts in public disclosures. Keep a private record for your own reference.

7. CREATE Walkthrough: Human Contribution and Authorship

In Lesson 9.1 we covered the C (Source and Rights Identification) and R (Permission and Licence Conditions) elements of CREATE. Now we focus on the next two elements: E (Human Creative and Intellectual Contribution) and A (Authorship and Attribution).

Placeholder: [INSERT AUTHOR-APPROVED CREATE EXPANSION]

Operationally, CREATE includes:

Element E: Human Creative and Intellectual Contribution

E — Human Creative and Intellectual Contribution

Identify the human contributions to the work, including conception, selection, analysis, argument, expression, revision, verification, and approval.

Guiding questions:

Example: A researcher defines a research question, collects data, performs statistical analysis, writes the manuscript, and reviews the final version. These are substantial human contributions.

Common mistake: Assuming that providing a prompt to an AI constitutes a significant intellectual contribution. It may be minimal if the AI does most of the work.

Safeguard: Document each step of your contribution. If your contribution is minimal, reconsider whether you should claim authorship or instead acknowledge the AI as a tool.

Escalation: If the human contribution is insufficient to justify authorship, you may need to redesign your approach, increase your involvement, or seek guidance.

Residual limitation

There is no universally agreed threshold for what constitutes sufficient human contribution. It depends on the context, discipline, and institutional policy. Always check the relevant guidelines.

Element A: Authorship and Attribution

A — Authorship and Attribution

Determine who should be listed as author(s), identify all contributors, and provide appropriate attribution and acknowledgement.

Guiding questions:

Example: In a co-authored paper, both authors contributed equally to design, analysis, and writing. Both are listed as authors. A research assistant who performed data cleaning is acknowledged, not listed as an author.

Common mistake: Listing an AI system as a co-author or author. This is not accepted in academic or professional contexts because AI cannot take responsibility.

Safeguard: Follow the authorship criteria of your institution, publisher, or profession. Document all contributions and make decisions transparently.

Stop condition: If authorship is disputed, or if you are unsure who qualifies, pause and seek resolution through consultation or policy.

Residual limitation

Attribution norms vary widely across disciplines. For example, in some fields, the order of authors indicates contribution level; in others, it indicates seniority. Always check the specific guidelines.

8. Process Walkthrough: Human Purpose to Responsibility

Use this process to evaluate and document human and AI contributions, and to determine authorship and attribution.

Table 2. Authorship and contribution process
Stage Action Guiding Question Example
1. Purpose Define the human purpose and goal. What is the objective of the work? Write a research paper on renewable energy policy.
2. Conception Identify the human’s original ideas. What ideas did the human bring? Hypothesis: subsidies are more effective than mandates.
3. Source Selection Document which sources the human selected. What sources did the human choose? The human selected 10 peer-reviewed articles.
4. Human Analysis Record the human’s analytical contribution. What analysis did the human perform? Human interpreted data, compared policies.
5. AI-Supported Tasks List tasks where AI was used. What did the AI do? AI generated a first draft, suggested references.
6. AI-Generated Material Identify material produced by AI. What content came from AI? AI wrote 60% of the paper’s body.
7. Human Revision Describe the human’s revisions. How did the human modify the AI output? Human restructured, added examples, rewrote sections.
8. Verification Document verification steps. Did the human verify facts and sources? Human checked all references and statistics.
9. Approval Record final approval. Who approved the final work? Human approved the final version.
10. Author Designation List authors based on contribution. Who are the authors? The human is the sole author, AI acknowledged.
11. Contributor Acknowledgement Acknowledge non-author contributors. Who else should be acknowledged? AI tool acknowledged for drafting assistance.
12. Source Attribution Cite all sources used. What sources need citation? All 10 articles, plus any others used.
13. AI Disclosure Prepare disclosure of AI use. What disclosure is required? Disclose that AI was used to generate a first draft.
14. Human Voice and Agency Ensure the work reflects the human. Does the work have the human’s voice? Yes, revisions reflect the human’s style.
15. Responsibility Statement State who accepts responsibility. Who is accountable? The human accepts full responsibility.
16. Remaining Uncertainty Identify unresolved issues. What is still unclear? Whether the AI-generated references are authentic.
Process walkthrough: complete analysis

Scenario: A student uses AI to brainstorm ideas for a term paper. They then write the paper themselves, using the AI’s suggestions as inspiration, but none of the AI’s text is used verbatim. They cite the AI’s suggestions as a source.

  1. Purpose: Write a term paper on cybersecurity.
  2. Conception: The student came up with the thesis.
  3. Source Selection: The student chose all academic sources.
  4. Human Analysis: The student did all analysis and writing.
  5. AI-Supported Tasks: AI suggested topic angles and potential references.
  6. AI-Generated Material: None used verbatim; only ideas.
  7. Human Revision: Not applicable, as AI text was not used.
  8. Verification: Student verified all sources.
  9. Approval: Student approved the final paper.
  10. Author Designation: Sole author.
  11. Contributor Acknowledgement: Acknowledge AI for brainstorming.
  12. Source Attribution: Cite all academic sources, and note AI inspiration.
  13. AI Disclosure: Disclose that AI was used for brainstorming only.
  14. Human Voice: The paper is entirely the student’s voice.
  15. Responsibility: Student takes full responsibility.

9. Self-Check Quiz

Test your understanding of authorship and contribution concepts. These questions are formative and ungraded.

Question 1: Which of the following is not a characteristic of human authorship?

Select one:
Show answer

Answer: d.

Generation of text based on training data describes AI, not human authorship.

Question 2: A student uses an AI system to write the first draft of an essay, then makes minor edits. What is the most accurate characterisation of the student’s role?

Select one:
Show answer

Answer: c.

The student’s contribution is minimal, and the AI generated the bulk of the content. They should disclose AI use and may not qualify as sole author in an academic context.

Question 3: True or False: An AI system can be listed as a co-author if it contributed significantly to the work.

Select one:
Show answer

Answer: False.

AI systems cannot be co-authors because they cannot accept responsibility, verify claims, or exercise judgment. They are tools and should be acknowledged, not credited as authors.

Question 4: Which of the following is a form of human intellectual contribution?

Select one:
Show answer

Answer: a.

Selecting sources requires human judgment and is a form of intellectual contribution. Generating text based on prompts is AI; formatting is a mechanical task, though it may be part of editorial work.

Question 5: What is the primary reason for documenting provenance in AI-assisted work?

Select one:
Show answer

Answer: a.

Provenance helps you defend your work and demonstrate integrity by documenting what was done and how.

Question 6: Distinguish between attribution and acknowledgement.

Show answer

Answer: Attribution identifies the source or creator of specific content (e.g., citing a book). Acknowledgement is broader and includes thanking contributors or tools (e.g., “I used ChatGPT for brainstorming”). Attribution is often required; acknowledgement is a matter of transparency and courtesy.

Question 7: A researcher designs a study, analyses data, writes the manuscript, and verifies all results. A colleague provides some editorial feedback. Who is the author?

Select one:
Show answer

Answer: a.

The colleague provided editorial feedback, which is typically acknowledged but does not constitute authorship unless they made significant intellectual contributions.

Question 8: Why is it important to preserve your own voice when using AI?

Show answer

Answer: Preserving your voice ensures that the work reflects your understanding, perspective, and authenticity. It also helps maintain academic and professional integrity, as it demonstrates that the work is genuinely yours.

10. Practice Exercises

Complete these exercises to apply the concepts of authorship and contribution.

📝 Exercise 9.2.1: Identify Forms of Human Contribution
  • Difficulty: Introductory
  • Estimated time: ~10 min
  • Learning outcome: Identify forms of human contribution.

Scenario: A student writes a paper on social media and mental health. They conduct a literature review, develop a theoretical framework, write the paper, and then use an AI tool to polish the grammar and syntax.

Questions:

  1. List the human contributions.
  2. What did the AI contribute?
  3. Would you consider the student the sole author? Why?
Show sample answer
  1. Human: Conceived the topic, conducted literature review, developed framework, wrote the paper, and verified content.
  2. AI: Polished grammar and syntax.
  3. Yes, the student is the sole author because the intellectual content is entirely their own; the AI was used only as an editing tool.
📝 Exercise 9.2.2: Classify Contributor Roles
  • Difficulty: Introductory
  • Estimated time: ~10 min
  • Learning outcome: Classify contributor roles.

Scenario: A team of researchers and a graphic designer produce a scientific paper with complex figures. The roles are:

  • Researcher A: Designed the study, collected data, wrote the paper.
  • Researcher B: Analysed data, contributed to writing and revisions.
  • Graphic Designer: Created the figures based on the researchers’ specifications.
  • AI tool: Used to generate a first draft of the literature review.

Questions:

  1. Who would you classify as authors?
  2. Who would be acknowledged as contributors?
  3. How should the AI be acknowledged?
Show sample answer
  1. Authors: Researcher A and Researcher B, as they contributed to design, analysis, and writing.
  2. Contributors: The graphic designer should be acknowledged for creating the figures.
  3. AI: The AI should be acknowledged as a tool used for drafting the literature review; specify the tool and the extent of its use.
📝 Exercise 9.2.3: Distinguish Authorship from Tool Use
  • Difficulty: Intermediate
  • Estimated time: ~12 min
  • Learning outcome: Distinguish authorship from tool use.

Scenario: A professional uses an AI system to generate a full business report. They input the key data points and goals, and the AI generates the report structure, analysis, and recommendations. The professional reviews the report, makes a few minor changes, and approves it.

Questions:

  1. Is the professional the author of the report?
  2. What is the professional’s role?
  3. What should the professional do to uphold integrity?
Show sample answer
  1. Authorship: The professional may be considered the author in a legal or organisational sense, but ethically, they should not claim sole credit if they did not create the content. They are more of a supervisor or approver.
  2. Role: The professional acted as a reviewer and approver, not as the primary creator.
  3. Integrity: The professional should clearly disclose that the report was generated with AI assistance, specify the AI tool, and indicate their own contributions (input data, review, and approval).
📝 Exercise 9.2.4: Evaluate a Human Contribution Claim
  • Difficulty: Advanced
  • Estimated time: ~15 min
  • Learning outcome: Evaluate a human contribution claim.

Scenario: A student submits a project report. The report includes a section generated by an AI from a prompt the student wrote. The student then rewrote that section entirely in their own words, but kept the structure and ideas. The student claims sole authorship.

Questions:

  1. What is the student’s intellectual contribution?
  2. What is the AI’s contribution?
  3. Is the student justified in claiming sole authorship?
  4. What disclosure or attribution is appropriate?
Show sample answer
  1. Human contribution: The student provided the prompt, rewrote the section in their own words, and added their own phrasing.
  2. AI contribution: The AI generated the initial ideas and structure.
  3. Justification: It is questionable to claim sole authorship because the ideas and structure were AI-generated. The student should acknowledge AI assistance for the initial ideas.
  4. Disclosure: The student should disclose that the section was inspired by AI-generated ideas, and that they rewrote it. They should also cite any sources the AI may have used.
📝 Exercise 9.2.5: Develop an Attribution and Acknowledgement Plan
  • Difficulty: Intermediate
  • Estimated time: ~12 min
  • Learning outcome: Develop an attribution and acknowledgement plan.

Scenario: You are writing a blog post. You used an AI to generate a first draft, then heavily revised it, adding your own examples and insights. You also used two images from Creative Commons sources.

Questions:

  1. What sources need citation or attribution?
  2. Do you need to acknowledge the AI?
  3. What should your attribution and acknowledgement plan include?
Show sample answer
  1. Attribution needed: The two images (credit the creators and licence information). Also, any sources the AI may have referenced.
  2. Acknowledge AI: Yes, because the AI generated the first draft. Acknowledge the AI tool and specify that it was used for drafting, and that you revised it.
  3. Plan: Include a note at the end: “This post was drafted with the assistance of [AI tool] and subsequently revised and expanded by the author. Images are used under CC BY 4.0; credit to [photographer].”
📝 Exercise 9.2.6: Identify How to Preserve Human Voice and Responsibility
  • Difficulty: Intermediate
  • Estimated time: ~10 min
  • Learning outcome: Preserve human voice and responsibility.

Scenario: You are writing a reflective journal entry for a course. You use an AI to generate a draft, but you find it too generic and lacking personal experience.

Questions:

  1. How can you revise the AI draft to preserve your voice?
  2. What steps can you take to ensure the reflection is genuine and accountable?
  3. Should you disclose the AI use? Why?
Show sample answer
  1. Revise: Replace generic statements with specific personal experiences, add your own analysis, and use your own language style.
  2. Accountability: Verify that the content accurately reflects your views, and take responsibility for the final entry.
  3. Disclosure: Yes, disclose that you used AI for drafting, because the reflection is about your personal learning; transparency is important for integrity.

11. Homework Problems

Formative · Ungraded · Recommended preparation for Assignment 3 and evidence for Assignment 1.

🧠 Problem 9.2.1: Authorship Problem

A student uses an AI to generate a list of potential research questions, then chooses one and writes the entire paper themselves. Is the student the sole author? Why or why not?

Show solution design

Solution: The student is the sole author because the intellectual content (research, analysis, writing) is entirely their own. The AI was used as a tool for brainstorming, which is a minor contribution. The student should acknowledge the AI’s role in brainstorming.

🧠 Problem 9.2.2: Contribution Roles

A team of three people works on a project. Person A writes the code, Person B designs the user interface, and Person C writes the documentation. They all contribute equally to the project. How should authorship be determined?

Show solution design

Solution: In many cases, all three would be co-authors if they made significant contributions. However, if it’s a software project, the code author might be the lead author, with the others acknowledged. The team should agree on authorship based on their specific context and institutional guidelines.

🧠 Problem 9.2.3: Editor vs. Author

A professional editor revises a manuscript for clarity and grammar but does not change the content or ideas. Should the editor be listed as an author?

Show solution design

Solution: No, the editor should be acknowledged in the acknowledgements, not listed as an author, because they did not contribute to the intellectual content.

🧠 Problem 9.2.4: AI Tool Classification

A researcher uses an AI tool to translate a paper from English to French. Should the AI be considered a translator, a tool, or something else? How should the translation be attributed?

Show solution design

Solution: The AI is a tool. The researcher should acknowledge the use of the translation tool and, if required, indicate that the translation was AI-generated. The original author remains the author of the content; the translation does not create a new author.

🧠 Problem 9.2.5: Attribution

A writer uses a quote from a book in their essay and also uses an AI to paraphrase another passage from the same book. How should they attribute both?

Show solution design

Solution: Both the quote and the paraphrased passage need to cite the original book. Additionally, the writer should acknowledge the use of AI for the paraphrase, specifying the tool.

🧠 Problem 9.2.6: Acknowledgement

A student receives help from a tutor on structuring their essay. The tutor does not write any content. How should the student acknowledge this help?

Show solution design

Solution: The student should thank the tutor in an acknowledgement section, noting that they provided guidance on structure.

🧠 Problem 9.2.7: Provenance

You are working on a collaborative project with a colleague. You both contribute to writing and revising. You also use an AI to generate some data visualisations. What provenance records should you keep?

Show solution design

Solution: Keep a record of: who wrote which sections, the AI tool used for visualisations, the prompts used, the outputs, the revisions made, and the final approval. This helps resolve any questions about authorship and contribution.

🧠 Problem 9.2.8: Responsibility

A professional uses an AI to draft a legal opinion. The AI makes a factual error. Who is responsible for the error?

Show solution design

Solution: The professional is responsible for the error, even though the AI generated the text. They should have verified the facts and are accountable for the final opinion.

🧠 Problem 9.2.9: Transfer Problem

You are taking over a project from a colleague who used AI extensively. The colleague is no longer available. How do you determine authorship and contribution for the final work?

Show solution design

Solution: If you cannot determine the extent of AI contribution, you should err on the side of transparency and disclose that some parts may have been AI-generated by the previous colleague. You may also need to review and verify the content yourself.

🧠 Problem 9.2.10: Authorship Dispute

Two researchers disagree on who should be first author. One contributed more to the analysis, the other to writing. How should they resolve this?

Show solution design

Solution: They should discuss their contributions and decide based on the norms of their discipline. If they cannot agree, they might consult their supervisor or an institutional ethics committee. They should also document their agreement.

🧠 Problem 9.2.11: AI Acknowledgement in Publishing

You are submitting a paper to a journal that requires authors to disclose any AI use. The journal’s policy states that AI cannot be listed as an author. You used AI to generate a draft and then revised it. What should your disclosure statement include?

Show solution design

Solution: Your statement should specify the AI tool, the tasks it performed (e.g., generating an initial draft), and your role in revising and verifying the content. Confirm that you take full responsibility for the paper.

🧠 Problem 9.2.12: Preserving Human Voice

You are a creative writer who uses an AI to generate story ideas. You then write the story yourself. How can you ensure your voice comes through?

Show solution design

Solution: Use the AI’s ideas as a starting point, but then write the story in your own style, adding your own unique descriptions, dialogue, and emotional depth. Ensure the final work reflects your voice.

🧠 Problem 9.2.13: Responsibility and Correction

A student submits a paper that contains a significant factual error. The error was introduced by an AI that the student used. What should the student do?

Show solution design

Solution: The student should immediately notify the instructor, correct the error, and provide a revised version. They should also reflect on their verification process and consider how to prevent such errors in the future.

12. Mini-Project: Human Contribution and Authorship Record

📁 Project: Human Contribution and Authorship Record
  • Purpose: Analyse a synthetic AI-assisted work and produce a comprehensive human contribution and authorship record.
  • Learning outcomes: All Unit 9.2 outcomes, with emphasis on distinguishing human from AI contributions, authorship designation, and disclosure.
  • Estimated effort: 90–150 minutes.

Scenario

You are a consultant preparing a policy brief on renewable energy adoption for a government agency. You used an AI system in the following ways:

  • Brainstorming: You asked the AI to generate a list of key barriers to renewable energy adoption.
  • Drafting: You asked the AI to write a first draft of the brief based on your notes and sources.
  • Data visualisation: You used an AI tool to generate charts from data you provided.
  • Revision: You heavily revised the AI’s draft, adding your own analysis, examples, and policy recommendations.
  • Verification: You verified all data and sources.

The final brief is 10 pages long. You estimate that about 40% of the text was significantly revised from the AI draft, and about 60% is original content you wrote. The AI contributed to the structure and initial phrasing.

Required Sections

Complete the following sections to document the human contribution and authorship:

  1. Work and purpose: Describe the work and its intended audience.
  2. Intended audience: Who is the audience?
  3. Human contributors: List all human contributors and their roles.
  4. Human conception: What ideas did the human(s) bring?
  5. Source selection: Which sources were selected by humans?
  6. Human analysis: What analysis did the human perform?
  7. AI-supported tasks: List tasks where AI was used.
  8. AI-generated material: Describe the material generated by AI.
  9. Human revision: Describe the revisions made.
  10. Verification: Document verification steps.
  11. Approval: Who approved the final work?
  12. Author designation: Who should be listed as author(s)?
  13. Contributor acknowledgement: Who should be acknowledged?
  14. Source attribution: What sources need attribution?
  15. AI disclosure need: What AI use should be disclosed?
  16. Human voice and agency: How is the human voice preserved?
  17. Responsibility statement: Who accepts responsibility?
  18. Remaining uncertainty: What is unclear?
  19. Preliminary recommendation: What is your recommendation regarding authorship and attribution?
Show staged hints

Hint 1: Start by listing all human activities and AI activities separately.

Hint 2: For the author designation, consider whether the human contributions are sufficient to claim sole authorship, or whether the AI should be acknowledged.

Hint 3: The disclosure should be specific about which tasks the AI performed and how the human revised and verified.

Hint 4: Ensure the responsibility statement clearly states that the human is accountable for the final work.

Show solution architecture
  1. Work and purpose: Policy brief for government agency on renewable energy barriers.
  2. Human contributors: You are the sole human contributor.
  3. Human conception: You defined the scope, key questions, and policy recommendations.
  4. Source selection: You selected all academic and government sources.
  5. Human analysis: You interpreted the data, synthesised findings, and developed recommendations.
  6. AI-supported tasks: Brainstorming list, drafting, and chart generation.
  7. AI-generated material: Initial draft text and charts.
  8. Human revision: You revised 40% of the draft, added original content, and rewrote sections.
  9. Verification: You checked all data, sources, and policy recommendations.
  10. Approval: You approved the final brief.
  11. Author designation: You are the sole author, as the intellectual content and analysis are yours.
  12. Contributor acknowledgement: Acknowledge the AI tool for drafting and visualisation assistance.
  13. Source attribution: Cite all sources used in the brief.
  14. AI disclosure: Disclose that AI was used for brainstorming, drafting, and chart generation, and specify the tools.
  15. Human voice: The brief reflects your analysis and policy style.
  16. Responsibility: You take full responsibility for the content.
  17. Uncertainty: None major; all data verified.
  18. Recommendation: Proceed with the brief, including full disclosure of AI use.
Show illustrative partial example (selected sections)

Section 3: Human contributors
Sole contributor: [Your Name], Consultant.

Section 6: Human analysis
I synthesised data from multiple sources to identify the most significant barriers, compared policy options, and developed evidence-based recommendations.

Section 9: Human revision
I added new sections on economic feasibility and stakeholder engagement, rewrote the introduction to focus on the problem, and restructured the recommendations section to improve clarity. I also replaced AI-generated phrasing with my own language.

Section 12: Author designation
I am the sole author. The AI was used as a writing and visualisation assistant, but all intellectual content, analysis, and recommendations are my own.

Section 15: AI disclosure
I used [AI tool] to generate an initial draft based on my notes and to create data visualisations. I revised all AI-generated content and verified all data and sources.

Self-Review Checklist

  • Did I clearly distinguish human and AI contributions?
  • Did I justify the author designation based on substantial human contribution?
  • Did I include a disclosure of AI use that is specific and accurate?
  • Did I provide a responsibility statement?
  • Did I identify any remaining uncertainties?
  • Did I recommend a clear course of action?

13. Summary & Key Takeaways

Remember these points
  • Human authorship involves accountable contributions: conception, analysis, expression, revision, verification, and responsibility.
  • AI is a tool, not an author. It cannot take responsibility or exercise judgment.
  • Contributor roles vary: authors, co-authors, editors, reviewers, and tools each have different levels of credit and responsibility.
  • Attribution identifies sources; acknowledgement thanks contributors; disclosure reveals AI involvement.
  • Provenance documentation (prompts, outputs, revisions, verification) is essential for integrity and accountability.
  • Preserving your voice and agency is key to maintaining authentic authorship.
  • The CREATE framework’s E (Human Contribution) and A (Authorship/Attribution) help systematically analyse these issues.

Key Distinctions

Table 3. Authorship and contribution terms compared
Concept Definition Example
Author Accountable creator with significant intellectual contribution. Researcher who wrote the paper.
Co-author Shares responsibility with equivalent contributions. Two researchers who jointly designed and wrote the study.
Contributor Provided specific, limited assistance. Data collector or proofreader.
Tool Instrument used to assist. AI system, software.
Attribution Crediting sources or creators. Citation of a book.
Acknowledgement Thanking contributors or tools. “Thanks to X for editing.”
Disclosure Formal statement of AI use. “This paper was drafted with ChatGPT.”

Common Misconceptions

Process Reminder

Before finalising an AI-assisted work, complete the authorship and contribution record:

  1. Define the purpose and audience.
  2. Document human conception and ideas.
  3. Record source selection and analysis.
  4. List AI-supported tasks and outputs.
  5. Describe human revision and verification.
  6. Determine author designation and contributor acknowledgements.
  7. Prepare attribution and disclosure statements.
  8. Accept responsibility for the final work.

14. Next Steps

You have now completed Lesson 9.2. You understand the distinction between human and AI contributions, how to assign authorship and acknowledge contributors, and the importance of provenance and accountability.

Next lesson: Lesson 9.3 — Plagiarism, Paraphrasing, Style Imitation, and Academic Integrity — where you will learn to distinguish plagiarism from copyright infringement, evaluate paraphrasing, and understand the risks of style imitation and synthetic content.

Assignment 3 connection: The authorship and contribution analysis you practised in this lesson is directly applicable to Assignment 3. Keep your records and reflections for use in your case analysis.

💡 Reflection prompt: How does the concept of human authorship and accountability change the way you approach using AI in your work? Consider a recent AI-assisted project and evaluate your contribution against the criteria discussed.
Continue to Lesson 9.3: Plagiarism, Paraphrasing, Style Imitation, and Academic Integrity Return to Unit 9 Home
👤