“It Tends to Remove Things I Originally Wanted to Emphasize”: Effects of ChatGPT Revision on Rhetorical Move-Steps in Personal Statements

Abstract

As ChatGPT is increasingly used in second language (L2) writing practice and research, its potential to provide feedback and revision has attracted much scholarly attention. However, it remains largely unknown whether and how ChatGPT revision can influence rhetorical move-steps. This study investigates the effects of ChatGPT revision on rhetorical move-steps in English personal statements (PSs) written by L2 English undergraduate students, using a combination of corpus data and stimulated recall interviews. Based on an unstructured prompt, our analysis revealed significant reductions in the rhetorical efforts devoted to five rhetorical steps. Students’ responses highlighted both benefits and concerns regarding these revisions, illustrating how AI-generated changes can alter textual features and affect writer-reader communication from the writers’ perspective. The findings highlight the importance of students’ critical evaluation of AI-generated revisions and iterative engagement with them.

Keywords

ChatGPT revision rhetorical move-steps personal statement

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abdi Tabari

Kushki

Wang

. (2025). Comparing the effects of teacher- and AI-mediated corrective feedback on accuracy, complexity, and quality in L2 written narratives. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2025.2561608

Bai

Wei

(2024). Exploring EFL learners’ integration and perceptions of ChatGPT’s text revisions: A three-stage writing task study. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 17, 2161–2172. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2024.3491864

Bansal

Chamola

Hussain

Guizani

Niyato

(2024). Transforming conversations with AI—A comprehensive study of ChatGPT. Cognitive Computation, 16(5), 2487–2510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-023-10236-2

Barrot

J. S.

(2023). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Pitfalls and potentials. Assessing Writing, 57, 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100745

Bekins

L. K.

Huckin

T. N.

Kijak

(2004). The personal statement in medical school applications: Rhetorical structure in a diverse and unstable context. Issues in Writing, 15(1), 56–75.

Bhatia

(1993). Analyzing genre: Language use in professional settings. Longman.

Brown

R. M.

(2004). Self-composed: Rhetoric in psychology personal statements. Written Communication, 21(3), 242–260.

Brown

R. M.

(2005). The rhetoric of self-promotion in personal statements [Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Casal

J. E.

Kessler

(2020). Form and rhetorical function of phrase-frames in promotional writing: A corpus- and genre-based analysis. System, 95, 102370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102370

10.

Castaño Arques

López-Ferrero

. (2023). Peer-feedback of an occluded genre in the Spanish language classroom: A case study. Assessing Writing, 57, 100756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100756

11.

Chen

(2025). Evaluating the potential of ChatGPT-reformulated essays as written feedback in L2 writing. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 9, 100500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100500

12.

Chen

Zhu

Wei

(2024). L2 students’ barriers in engaging with form and content-focused AI-generated feedback in revising their compositions. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2024.2422478

13.

Chiu

Y. L. T.

(2015). Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers’ evaluative perspectives. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 17, 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.002

14.

Chiu

Y. L. T.

(2016). ‘Singing your tune’: Genre structure and writer identity in personal statements for doctoral applications. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 21, 48–59.

15.

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge.

16.

Cotos

Huffman

Link

(2017). A move/step model for methods sections: Demonstrating rigour and credibility. English for Specific Purposes, 46, 90–106.

17.

Cotos

Pendar

(2016). Discourse classification into rhetorical functions for AWE feedback. CALICO Journal, 33(1), 92–116.

18.

Crossley

S. A.

McNamara

D. S.

(2016). Say more and be more coherent: How text elaboration and cohesion can increase writing quality. Journal of Writing Research, 7(3), 351–370.

19.

Ding

(2007). Genre analysis of personal statements: Analysis of moves in application essays to medical and dental schools. English for Specific Purposes, 26(3), 368–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.09.004

20.

Escalante

Pack

Barrett

(2023). AI-generated feedback on writing: Insights into efficacy and ENL student preference. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 57. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00425-2

21.

Guo

(2024). Understanding EFL students’ use of self-made AI chatbots as personalized writing assistance tools: A mixed methods study. System, 124, 103362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103362

22.

Han

(2024). Exploring ChatGPT-supported teacher feedback in the EFL context. System, 126, 103502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103502

23.

Herbold

Hautli-Janisz

Heuer

Kikteva

Trautsch

(2023). A large-scale comparison of human-written versus ChatGPT-generated essays. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 18617. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-45644-9

24.

Hyland

(2004). Genre and second language writing. University of Michigan Press.

25.

Hyland

(2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(3), 148–164.

26.

Hyland

(2012). Disciplinary identities: Individuality and community in academic discourse. Cambridge University Press.

27.

Jiang

Hyland

(2025a). Does ChatGPT argue like students? Bundles in argumentative essays. Applied Linguistics, 46(3), 375–391. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amae052

28.

Jiang

Hyland

(2025b). Rhetorical distinctions: Comparing metadiscourse in essays by ChatGPT and students. English for Specific Purposes, 79, 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2025.03.001

29.

Kessler

(2020). A text analysis and gatekeepers’ perspectives of a promotional genre: Understanding the rhetoric of Fulbright grant statements. English for Specific Purposes, 60, 182–192.

30.

Kim

(2024). Exploring the potential of using ChatGPT for rhetorical move-step analysis: The impact of prompt refinement, few-shot learning, and fine-tuning. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 71, 101422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101422

31.

Kim

Qiu

Wang

Y. A.

(2024). Interrater agreement in genre analysis: A methodological review and a comparison of three measures. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 3(1), 100097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100097

32.

Kohnke

Moorhouse

B. L.

Zou

(2023). ChatGPT for language teaching and learning. RELC Journal, 54(2), 537–550.

33.

Koltovskaia

Rahmati

Saeli

(2024). Graduate students’ use of ChatGPT for academic text revision: Behavioral, cognitive, and affective engagement. Journal of Second Language Writing, 65, 101130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2024.101130

34.

Deng

(2019). I am what I have written: A case study of identity construction in and through personal statement writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 37, 70–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.11.005

35.

Deng

(2021). Disciplinarily capable and personally unique: Voicing disciplinary identity in personal statement writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 50, 100949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100949

36.

Deng

Gao

(2023). From out-group to in-group: Exercising agency for gaining membership through statement of purposes writing. System, 116, 103081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103081

37.

Liu

Jiang

(2023). Figure legends of scientific research articles: Rhetorical moves and phrase frames. English for Specific Purposes, 70, 86–100.

38.

Liu

(2025a). Comparing GPT-based approaches in automated writing evaluation. Assessing Writing, 66, 100961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2025.100961

39.

Liu

(2025b). Enhancing GPT-based automated essay scoring: The impact of fine-tuning and linguistic complexity measures. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2025.2518430

40.

López-Ferrero

Bach

(2016). Discourse analysis of statements of purpose: Connecting academic and professional genres. Discourse Studies, 18(3), 286–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445616634553

41.

Yoon

Kisselev

(2021). Matching phrase-frames to rhetorical moves in social science research article introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 61, 63–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2020.10.001

42.

Mizumoto

Yasuda

Tamura

(2024). Identifying ChatGPT-generated texts in EFL students’ writing: Through comparative analysis of linguistic fingerprints. Applied Corpus Linguistics, 4(3), 100106.

43.

Moreno

A. I.

(2024). Making room for research promotion in RA discussion/closing sections: A Spanish-English comparative approach. English for Specific Purposes, 75, 86–101.

44.

Moreno

A. I.

Swales

J. M.

(2018). Strengthening move analysis methodology towards bridging the function-form gap. English for Specific Purposes, 50, 40–63.

45.

Nakai

Shintani

(2025). From ‘nativelike’ to practical: Comparing human and AI reformulation as written feedback. RELC Journal. Advance online publication.

46.

Nguyen

T. T. H.

(2023). EFL teachers’ perspectives toward the use of ChatGPT in writing classes: A case study at Van Lang University. International Journal of Language Instruction, 2(3), 1–47.

47.

Nystrand

(1989). A social-interactive model of writing. Written Communication, 6(1), 66–85.

48.

Omizo

Hart-Davidson

(2024). Is genre enough? A theory of genre signaling as generative AI rhetoric. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 54(3), 272–285.

49.

OpenAI. (2025, September 5). Why language models hallucinate. https://openai.com/index/why-language-models-hallucinate/

50.

OpenAI. (n.d.). How ChatGPT and our foundation models are developed. https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7842364-how-chatgpt-and-our-foundation-models-are-developed

51.

Pallant

(2007). SPSS survival manual: A step-by-step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows. Open University Press.

52.

Qian

(2025). Prompt engineering in education: A systematic review of approaches and educational applications. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 63(7–8), 1782–1818.

53.

Rau

Shih

Y. S.

(2021). Evaluation of Cohen’s kappa and other measures of inter-rater agreement for genre analysis and other nominal data. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 53, 101026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.101026

54.

Rosenthal

(1994). Parametric measures of effect size. In Cooper

Hedges

L. V.

(Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 231–244). Russell Sage Foundation.

55.

Roumeliotis

K. I.

Tselikas

N. D.

(2023). ChatGPT and Open-AI models: A preliminary review. Future Internet, 15(6), 192. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi15060192

56.

Samraj

Monk

(2008). The statement of purpose in graduate program applications: Genre structure and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27(2), 193–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2007.07.001

57.

Shi

Chai

C. S.

Zhou

Aubrey

(2025). Comparing the effects of ChatGPT and automated writing evaluation on students’ writing and ideal L2 writing self. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2025.2454541

58.

Lin

Lai

(2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing classrooms. Assessing Writing, 57, 100752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100752

59.

Swales

J. M.

(1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.

60.

Swales

J. M.

(1996). Occluded genres in the academy: The case of the submission letter. In Ventola

Mauranen

(Eds.), Academic writing: Intercultural and textual issues (pp. 45–58). John Benjamins.

61.

Swales

J. M.

(2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge University Press.

62.

Swales

J. M.

(2009). Worlds of genre—Metaphors of genre. In Bazerman

Bonini

(Eds.), Genre in a changing world (pp. 3–16). Parlor Press.

63.

Teng

L. S.

Zhang

L. J.

(2020). Empowering learners in the second/foreign language classroom: Can self-regulated learning strategies-based writing instruction make a difference? Journal of Second Language Writing, 48, 100701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.100701

64.

Tsai

C. Y.

Lin

Y. T.

Brown

I. K.

(2024). Impacts of ChatGPT-assisted writing for EFL English majors: Feasibility and challenges. Education and Information Technologies, 29(17), 22427–22445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12722-y

65.

Wang

S. H.

Flowerdew

(2016). Participatory genre analysis of statements of purpose. Writing & Pedagogy, 8(1), 65–90.

66.

Wang

Chen

Brown

T. P.

(2022). “We improved presenting voice in our writing”: The role of teacher feedback in revising personal statements. Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 540–564.

67.

Wang

Y. A.

(2023). Demystifying academic promotional genre: A rhetorical move-step analysis of teaching philosophy statements (TPSs). Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 65, 101284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101284

68.

Wang

Y. A.

(2024). Unpacking the rhetoric of diversity, equity, and inclusion statements for academic job application purposes: A step-driven rhetorical move study. English for Specific Purposes, 75, 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2024.04.001

69.

Wang

Y. A.

(2025). “These are my ‘selling points’”: Disciplinary variation in rhetorical features of graduate school statements of purpose. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 73, 101469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101469

70.

Gao

(2014). The development of English learning motivation and learners’ identities: A structural equation modeling analysis of longitudinal data from Chinese universities. System, 47, 102–115.

71.

Yoon

Casal

J. E.

(2020). Rhetorical structure, sequence, and variation: A step-driven move analysis of applied linguistics conference abstracts. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 30(3), 462–478. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12300

72.

Zou

Huang

(2024). The impact of ChatGPT on L2 writing and expected responses: Voice from doctoral students. Education and Information Technologies, 29(11), 13201–13219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12397-x

73.

Zou

Guo

Wang

Liu

(2025). Investigating students’ uptake of teacher- and ChatGPT-generated feedback in EFL writing: A comparison study. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2024.2447279

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.03 MB

0.02 MB