You can produce a good summary of a text using AI tools. However, there are a few things you should consider before using these tools:
The text we are using is taken from The Conversation. It is entitled "Curious Kids: Why do people with synaesthesia link senses, and how does it work?" (Simner 2021). You should click on the link above to view the original article before you read the comments below. It is the same text used on the summaries (non-AI) page.
I asked ChatGPT 3.5 to provide a summary of the text mentioned above. The prompt I used was "Summarize the information in the following text in not more than 200 words + [the text]". The response I received was:
This is a reasonable summary of the facts stated in the original article, but there are problems. One problem is a question of style. The original text was written in a simple style in response to a query posed by an eleven-year-old. The ChatGPT response gave "a phenomenon where senses intertwine", which is a good way of rewriting "a special way of sensing the world – a merging or a linking of the senses" but it's more opaque than the original. There is also a question of cohesion. The word "synesthesia" (or it's derivatives; synesthetes, synesthetic) occurs 10 times in the summary, appearing at least once in every sentence but one, which seems excessive for such a short text. So there seems to be a problem with cohesion; there is repetition but there are few other cohesive ties (e.g. pronouns); it's a collection of unconnected sentences.
"It's estimated that there are two to five synesthetes per school" is problematic. The original was "On average, there are likely to be two to five other children in your school with synaesthesia" which is quite vague in itself. The summary version "It's estimated that there are" has a greater air of authority (if it were not a summary we would normally expect a citation at this point). It would probably best just to say that this phenomenon is not common (as in our none-AI summary).
ChatGPT chose "Synesthetes may associate colors with letters or numbers consistently from childhood, a condition called grapheme-color synesthesia" as an example. But it's not the most obvious or clearest example of a synesthetic phenomenon. It's also not clear where the word "consistently" comes from.
I tried another prompt: Summarize the information in the following text in not more than 200 words. Write the response in language an eleven year old could understand easily. The response was:
In this case the response was longer - 163 words. Although it is simpler to read, the style is still unsuitable; it's too chatty.
If you produced a summary like this from a ChatGPT response without editing it and without stating it was AI generated, and you were asked to defend it you might find yourself in trouble. It may be that you could get a better response by providing more information about your requirements in the prompt. But, whatever the response, you would still need to evaluate it and perhaps edit it. And you would still need to declare that you used ChatGPT to help you with your task.
An alternative approach is not to ask for a summary but to ask for a list of the main points in the submitted text.
In this case the prompt was: Extract five main ideas from the following text.
The response was:
I then asked ChatGPT for use the response to create a summary. In this case the prompt was: Use the above response to write a summary of not more than 150 words. The response was:
This is still not a excellent summary but it's the best AI generated one so far. It is more coherent with better cohesive ties. But it still has problems. It states that "Synaesthetes, those who experience synaesthesia, have unique sensory connections, associating colors with letters or numbers consistently." Written like that it seems that ALL synaesthetes associate colours with letters, but the original text only gives this as "one common type". Also, it is still unclear what "consistently" refers to.
ChatGPT can provide a summary which on a first reading seems plausible but to get a good one you need to write very specific instructions in the prompt. It's probably better to ask ChatGPT to provide a list of main points and then write the summary yourself. Whatever you do, you need to evaluate the result you are given and you can't do that well if you can't write a good summary yourself. You have to check for factual errors and you have to check for coherence and cohesion; a summary is still a text, not just a list of unrelated sentences. There needs to be a sense of flow. There should also be nothing in the summary which is not traceable to something in the original text. The recommendations concerning what not to include still apply if you use this tool. ChatGPT itself warns you "ChatGPT can make mistakes. Consider checking important information".
Whatever you write and publish, you need to be in control. If you use AI to help you write, edit or summarise, you need to give explicit instructions about what you require and you need to evaluate the text which AI provides. Otherwise the text is not yours and you are not in control.
Finally, if you use these tools, you must cite the source. The APA recommendations tell you how to do this. Other style guides will have similar recommendations. (OpenAI, 2024; see the Summaries Transcript Page for the full transcript). If you use AI in your work you need to declare that. You must consult your own institution's policy on academic integrity regarding the use of AI in you work, and abide by your institution's rules. See also Academic Integrity in the Age of AI.