Envíe este artículo por correo electrónico Análisis comparativo de las características lingüísticas y estilísticas de textos mediáticos humanos y generados artificialmente
Resumen
El rápido auge de la inteligencia artificial generativa (IA) ha planteado un nuevo desafío lingüístico: distinguir los textos mediáticos producidos por humanos de los generados por máquinas. Comprender las características cognitivas, estilísticas y pragmáticas del contenido generado por IA es crucial para evaluar su impacto en la calidad y fiabilidad de la comunicación. Este estudio tiene como objetivo identificar y caracterizar las
propiedades lingüísticas y estilísticas de los textos mediáticos generados por IA, en comparación con publicaciones periodísticas auténticas. Se emplearon análisis de corpus, estilométricos, cognitivo-pragmáticos y discursivos para evaluar las dimensiones léxicas, sintácticas, semánticas y retóricas. Los resultados indican que los textos producidos por modelos como ChatGPT, Gemini y BingAI presentan una mayor corrección gramatical,
una sintaxis estandarizada, un menor uso de metáforas y una menor expresividad emocional que los textos humanos. Cinco parámetros—variabilidad gramatical, riqueza semántica, relevancia pragmática, organización retórica y expresión estilística—definen la “humanidad” de un texto. Se desarrolló una clasificación de modelos estilísticos y marcadores lingüísticos para identificar el origen del texto y evaluar su profundidad cognitiva y comunicativa. Los hallazgos tienen aplicaciones prácticas para la detección automatizada de autoría de IA, la mejora de la alfabetización mediática digital y el establecimiento de estándares éticos para el uso de IA en el periodismo y la comunicación.
Palabras clave
Texto completo:
PDF (English)Referencias
Al-Muhaissen, B. M., S. Al-Hammouri, K. M. Rachdan, and M. Habes. 2025. How AI affects the pragmatic function in media discourse: A French press perspective. Forum for Linguistic Studies 7(1): 369–380. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i1.7800
Batsurovska, I., N. Dotsenko, O. Gorbenko, and N. Kim. 2021. The technology of competencies acquisition by bachelors in higher education institutions in the conditions of the digital media communication environment. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Trends in Languages, Literature and Social Communications, 206–213. Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210525.025
Bazaluk, O., O. Anisimov, P. Saik, V. Lozynskyi, O. Akimov, and L. Hrytsenko. 2023. Determining the safe distance for mining equipment operation when forming an internal dump in a deep open pit. Sustainability 15(7): 5912. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075912 mdpi.com
Curry, N., P. Baker, and G. Brookes. 2024. Generative AI for corpus approaches to discourse studies: A critical evaluation of ChatGPT. Applied Corpus Linguistics 4(1): 100082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acorp.2023.100082
D’Andrea, A., G. Fusacchia, and A. D’Ulizia. 2025. Linguistic insights, media mechanisms and role of AI in dissemination and impact of disinformation. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society. https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-01-2025-0014
Emara, I. F. 2025. A linguistic comparison between ChatGPT-generated and nonnative student-generated short story adaptations: A stylometric approach. Smart Learning Environments 12: 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-025-00388-z
Fedoriv, Y., I. Pirozhenko, and A. Shuhai. 2023. Linguistic analysis of human- and AIcreated content in academic discourse. Journal of Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University: Philology 10: 47–67. https://doi.org/10.15330/jpnuphil.10.47-67
Gherhe?, V., M. A. Farca?iu, M. Cernicova-Buca, and C. Coman. 2025. AI vs. humanauthored headlines: Evaluating the effectiveness, trust, and linguistic features of ChatGPT-generated clickbait and informative headlines in digital news. Information 16(2): 150. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16020150
González-Arias, C., E. Chatzikoumi, and X. López-García. 2024. The anthropomorphic pursuit of AI-generated journalistic texts: Limits to expressing subjectivity. Frontiers in Communication 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2024.1456509
Goulart, L., M. L. Matte, A. Mendoza, L. Alvarado, and I. Veloso. 2024. AI or student writing? Analyzing the situational and linguistic characteristics of undergraduate student writing and AI-generated assignments. Journal of Second Language Writing 66: 101160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2024.101160
Lewis, S. C., A. L. Guzman, T. R. Schmidt, and B. Lin. 2025. Generative AI and its disruptive challenge to journalism: An institutional analysis. Communication and Change 1(1): 9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44382-025-00008-x
Petricini, T. 2025. The power of language: Framing AI as an assistant, collaborator, or transformative force in cultural discourse. AI & Society. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-025-02586-2
Rad, M. H., F. Farsi, S. Bali, R. Etezadi, and M. Shamsfard. 2024. RFBES at SemEval2024 task 8: Investigating syntactic and semantic features for distinguishing AIgenerated and human-written texts. In Proceedings of the 18th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval-2024), 1–10. Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.semeval-1.69
Reinhart, A., B. Markey, M. Laudenbach, K. Pantusen, R. Yurko, G. Weinberg, and D. W. Brown. 2025. Do LLMs write like humans? Variation in grammatical and rhetorical styles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 122(8). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2422455122
Rosenfeld, A., and T. Lazebnik. 2024. Whose LLM is it anyway? Linguistic comparison and LLM attribution for GPT-3.5, GPT-4 and Bard. arXiv:2402.14533. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.14533
Sardinha, T. B. 2024. AI-generated vs human-authored texts: A multidimensional comparison. Applied Corpus Linguistics 4(1): 100083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acorp.2023.100083
Seals, S. M., and V. L. Shalin. 2023. Long-form analogies generated by ChatGPT lack human-like psycholinguistic properties. arXiv:2306.04537. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.04537
Shah, A., P. Ranka, U. Dedhia, S. Prasad, S. Muni, and K. Bhowmick. 2023. Detecting and unmasking AI-generated texts through explainable artificial intelligence using stylistic features. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications 14(10). http://dx.doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2023.01410110
Shaib, C., Y. Elazar, J. J. Li, and B. C. Wallace. 2024. Detection and measurement of syntactic templates in generated text. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 6416–6431. Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.368
Shavarskyi, I., V. Falshtynskyi, R. Dychkovskyi, O. Akimov, D. Sala, and V. Buketov. 2022. Management of the longwall face advance on the stress-strain state of rock mass. Mining of Mineral Deposits 16(3): 78–85. https://doi.org/10.33271/mining16.03.078 badap.agh.edu.pl
Simón, L. A., J. A. G. Gimeno, A. M. F.-P. Cesteros, M. F. Trinidad, and M. V. E. Vidal. 2023. Using linguistic knowledge for automated text identification. In IberLEF 2023 – Proceedings of the Iberian Languages Evaluation Forum, co-located with the Conference of the Spanish Society for Natural Language Processing, SEPLN 2023, Vol. 3496. CEUR Workshop Proceedings. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol3496/autextification-paper17.pdf
Sokil, O., S. Kucherkova, A. Kostyakova, N. Podolchak, Y. Sokil, and N. Shkvyria. 2022. The context of “globalization versus localization” after the world pandemic and quarantine. In S. G. Yaseen (ed.), Digital economy, business analytics, and big data analytics applications, Vol. 1010. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05258-3_8
Strübbe, S., I. Sidorenko, and R. Lampe. 2025. Comparison of grammar characteristics of human-written corpora and machine-generated texts using a novel rule-based parser. Information 16(4): 274. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16040274
Wan, Y.-N. 2024. Language differences in online complaint responses between generative artificial intelligence and hotel managers. Informatics 11(3): 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics11030066
Wu, J. 2025. A corpus-based multidimensional analysis of linguistic features between human-authored and ChatGPT-generated compositions. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation 8(5): 102–110. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2025.8.5.10
Wu, J., S. Yang, R. Zhan, Y. Yuan, L. S. Chao, and D. F. Wong. 2025. A survey on LLMgenerated text detection: Necessity, methods, and future directions. Computational Linguistics 51(1): 275–338. https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00549
Yanagita, Y., D. Yokokawa, S. Uchida, Y. Li, T. Uehara, and M. Ikusaka. 2024. Can AIgenerated clinical vignettes in Japanese be used medically and linguistically? Journal of General Internal Medicine 39(16): 3282–3289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-024-09031-y
Yildiz Durak, H., F. Egin, and A. Onan. 2025. A comparison of human-written versus AI-generated text in discussions at educational settings: Investigating features for ChatGPT, Gemini and BingAI. European Journal of Education 60(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.70014
Zaitsu, W., and M. Jin. 2023. Distinguishing ChatGPT-(3.5, -4)-generated and humanwritten papers through Japanese stylometric analysis. PLOS ONE 18(8). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288453
Zhang, M., and P. Crosthwaite. 2025. More human than human? Differences in lexis and collocation within academic essays produced by ChatGPT-3.5 and human L2 writers. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2024-0196
Zhaxylykbayeva, R., A. Burkitbayeva, B. Zhakhyp, K. Kabylgazina, and G. Ashirbekova. 2025. Artificial intelligence and journalistic ethics: A comparative analysis of AIgenerated content and traditional journalism. Journalism and Media 6(3): 105.
https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia6030105
| Se encuentra actualmente indizada en: | |||
 |  |  |  |
|  |
|  |
 |  |
| |
Todos los documentos publicados en esta revista se distribuyen bajo una
Licencia Creative Commons Atribución -No Comercial- Compartir Igual 4.0 Internacional.
Por lo que el envío, procesamiento y publicación de artículos en la revista es totalmente gratuito.