{"id":10422,"date":"2025-05-28T20:16:01","date_gmt":"2025-05-28T20:16:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sites.rutgers.edu\/books-we-read\/?p=10422"},"modified":"2025-05-28T20:16:01","modified_gmt":"2025-05-28T20:16:01","slug":"ai-and-writing-organization-tips","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.rutgers.edu\/books-we-read\/ai-and-writing-organization-tips\/","title":{"rendered":"AI and Writing: Organization Tips"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
AI-generated image from Canva<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Well folks, it looks like AI is here to stay. As someone who is a writer and researcher, it raises quite a conundrum. I could eschew any AI assistance with my writing, or I could embrace the technology and experiment with how it can help enhance and ease my workload. I have chosen the latter, but with limits. I imagine this will evolve over time along with the technology. As a follow up to recent posts<\/a> on AI and writing<\/a> done by fellow librarian and blogger, Judit Ward, I\u2019m sharing some of my experiences below.<\/p>\n

I have found generative AI such as ChatGPT to be very helpful in creating outlines for a variety of projects, including books, articles and presentations. These outlines serve as a launching pad to delve into more detail about each individual talking point. I have also used ChatGPT to help flesh out a rough outline I already created, which helps reinforce many of the main topics I had pinpointed. When doing this exercise, I often ask the question in a variety of slightly different ways just to see if anything changes (which it often does, even if just a little). Again, it gives more detail and depth to work with.<\/p>\n

But while using ChatGPT in this way is a great jumping off point for getting organized, it is important to note that results within topic headings can be very duplicative, which is why I only use it for creating an outline or overview. The summaries it creates are often simply regurgitations of concepts. Rewriting and shuffling around of information is necessary, as well as doing due diligence on fact checking. I have also seen some AI hallucinations in result sets. Hopefully this will get better over time.<\/p>\n

I have also used AI tools to get a handle on book and article ideas. For example, asking about the viability of a book on a certain topic, or if one has already been done. This is helpful, and sources such as ChatGPT will then produce an outline\/overview based on that subject. Again, it is important to note that this can also be repetitious. In addition, I have noticed results can vary greatly even from day to day. I have done a search one day, and then the following day or a week later a different answer comes up for the same search. It seems that the \u201csearching\u201d by the AI tool is always stacking the most recent or \u201cnew\u201d information on top. So, for example, as new insights and data come online, the tool is picking it up. It is not necessarily a bad thing, but just something to be aware of.<\/p>\n

It is also funny that tools like Google AI Overview can produce wording and data based on my own work, likely because I have done some very niche research within the realm of culinary history. As it searches the internet for what is already there, it often spits back the very same research I have already done. But if someone else is looking for one of the topics I have focused on in the past, it is honestly helpful in giving me some \u201cfree advertising.\u201d For example, when doing a search on cooking and \u201cMrs. Goodfellow\u201d (who was the topic of my first book, Mrs. Goodfellow: The Story of America\u2019s First Cooking School<\/em><\/a>)<\/em>, this was one of the results on how to find recipes related to Mrs. Goodfellow\u2019s cooking:<\/p>\n