Can artificial intelligence read our handwriting? A comparison of humans and artificial intelligence in the future of assessment
- 1Department of Primary Education, Gazi Faculty of Education, Gazi University, Ankara, Türkiye
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the legibility of fourth-grade elementary school students’ handwriting and to examine the differences and relationships between two evaluators: a human researcher and artificial intelligence (ChatGPT). To this end, the study was conducted using the descriptive survey model, one of the quantitative research approaches. The study sample consisted of 67 fourth-grade students attending a public elementary school. The students’ handwriting was evaluated using the Multidimensional Legibility Scale. Writing samples were collected from each student, including copying samples, dictated samples, and free writing samples. One class period was allocated for each writing task. The 201 handwriting samples obtained from the 67 students were evaluated by a researcher (the second author) and artificial intelligence (ChatGPT). According to the findings, no significant differences were detected between the artificial intelligence and the researcher in any writing type or subdimension, except for the slant subdimension of free writing. However, a high level of positive and significant correlation was identified between the two raters. Findings indicate that artificial intelligence can produce results comparable to those of expert raters when evaluating handwriting legibility. The fact that differences among raters are not statistically significant suggests that AI-based handwriting evaluations could serve as an objective and reliable alternative.
Related
- An Artificial Intelligence Model for Longitudinal Assessment of TCR Repertoires in SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Recipients
- Strategies for integrating artificial intelligence and cognitive assessment to predict disability progression in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: A model development study
- A comparison of artificial neural networks and partial least squares modelling for the rapid detection of the microbial spoilage of beef fillets based on Fourier transform infrared spectral fingerprints
- Growing up with artificial intelligence: An amplifier of inequalities and a public health issue
- Notification: Artificial Intelligence in Autism Spectrum Disorder Diagnosis: A Scoping Review of Face, Voice, and Text Analysis Methods.
BibTeX
@article{yasarturk2026artificial,
title = {{Can artificial intelligence read our handwriting? A comparison of humans and artificial intelligence in the future of assessment}},
author = {İsmail Yaşartürk and Halil İbrahim Öksüz and Ramazan Deniz and Mustafa Öztürk},
journal = {PLOS One},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0358694},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0358694},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Can artificial intelligence read our handwriting? A comparison of humans and artificial intelligence in the future of assessment
AU - İsmail Yaşartürk
AU - Halil İbrahim Öksüz
AU - Ramazan Deniz
AU - Mustafa Öztürk
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/21
JO - PLOS One
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0358694
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0358694
AB - The purpose of this study is to evaluate the legibility of fourth-grade elementary school students’ handwriting and to examine the differences and relationships between two evaluators: a human researcher and artificial intelligence (ChatGPT). To this end, the study was conducted using the descriptive survey model, one of the quantitative research approaches. The study sample consisted of 67 fourth-grade students attending a public elementary school. The students’ handwriting was evaluated using the Multidimensional Legibility Scale. Writing samples were collected from each student, including copying samples, dictated samples, and free writing samples. One class period was allocated for each writing task. The 201 handwriting samples obtained from the 67 students were evaluated by a researcher (the second author) and artificial intelligence (ChatGPT). According to the findings, no significant differences were detected between the artificial intelligence and the researcher in any writing type or subdimension, except for the slant subdimension of free writing. However, a high level of positive and significant correlation was identified between the two raters. Findings indicate that artificial intelligence can produce results comparable to those of expert raters when evaluating handwriting legibility. The fact that differences among raters are not statistically significant suggests that AI-based handwriting evaluations could serve as an objective and reliable alternative.
SN - 1932-6203
ER -