COMPARISON BETWEEN FIVE POPULAR PARAPHRASING TOOLS IN ACADEMIC WRITING IN TERMS OF STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, AND EFFECTIVENESS IN REPHRASING

Year 2025, Volume: 3 Issue: 1, 44 - 57, 27.06.2025

Hatem Musa , Ayad Almryad

https://doi.org/10.71074/CTC.1653566

Abstract

To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of five (5) widely used AI powered paraphrasing tools such as ChatGPT, Grammarly, Jasper, QuillBot and Copy AI in academic writing, the paper examines their strengths, weaknesses and performance. The research evaluates each of the tools’ ability to enhance lexical diversity, grammatical accuracy, semantic integrity, fluency, and structural modification on a dataset of 50 academic excerpts from diverse disciplines. Our findings demonstrate that while dedicated rephrasing tools exist, QuillBot surpasses the other tools in these types of tasks with the highest achieved lexical diversity (42.3%) and structural modification rate (65.8%) with strong semantic accuracy remaining high (4.6/5). Regarding readability (Flesch score: 58.2), it is close to the leader, and having a very good rephrasing flexibility (60.4% structural changes) makes it a close second. With 1.4 errors per 100 words committed to grammatical correctness (1.4), Grammarly is merely prioritizing correctness (1.4) in 1.4. Though these tools are useful for standard paraphrasing, they are less lexical diverse (31.2% and 21.7%) and less semantically preserved (3.5 and 3.2/5). Based on these results, it would be better to pick paraphrasing tools adequately to address some writing needs: QuillBot for doing in-depth academic rewording, Grammarly for error-free editing, and ChatGPT for balanced paraphrasing and reading.

Keywords

Academic writing , paraphrasing tools , AI writing assistants , lexical diversity , grammatical accuracy , text rewording etc

References

• C. W. . T. P. Kotmungkun, S., Kotmungkun openai chatgpt vs google gemini: A study of ai chatbots writing quality evaluation and plagiarism checking, English Language Teaching Educational Journal 7 (2024) 90–108.
• P. Baron, Are ai detection and plagiarism similarity scores worthwhile in the age of chatgpt and other generative ai?, Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in the South (SOTL) in the South 8(2) (2024) 151–179.
• S. K. D. M. A. A. M. Deblina Mazumder Setu1, Tania Islam1 Md.Erfan1, A comprehensive strategy foridentifying plagiarism inacademic submissions, Journal of Umm Al-Qura University for Engineering and Architecture (2025).
• Q. F. A. A. . A. T. H. Alamri, W., Leveraging chatgpt ai model in academic writing and avenues for further development: Swot framework. (2025).
• L. . A. B. T. . R. D. Stadnik, M., Ai and writing skills: Students’ attitudes towards using ai to enhance their writing based on the example of algebra university students, Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems (2025) 46–71.
• S. Junaedi, English lecturers’ perceptions towards the quillbot app: An alternative for students in paraphrasing and rewriting english writing, International Journal of Research in Education (2025) 149–156.
• A. A. M. Alia, M., How ai tools affect discourse markers when paraphrased. in using ai tools in text analysis, simplifi- cation, classification, and synthesis, IGI Global Scientific Publishing. (2025) 321–350.
• S. A. A. M. A. . N. R. M. A. Muneer, I., Has machine paraphrasing skills approached humans? detecting automatically and manually generated paraphrased cases, Journal of Big Data Published by Springer Nature (2025) 100507.
• A. R. Ayu Nuraeni, R. Bunga Febriani, Efl students perceptions on the use of quillbot paraphrasing tool in essay writing, Journal of English Education Program (JEEP) (2025) 86–74.
• D. I. S. Isli Iriani Indiah Pane1, Alvindi*2, Exploring students’ perceptions of grammarly as a tool for enhancing gram- mar accuracy in writing, VISION (2025) 90–140.
• L. R. Octaberlina, Integrating grammarly tools to enhance writing efficiency in senior high school, Jadila: Journal of Development and Innovation in Language and Literature Education (2023) 92–106.
• M. M. Aleksandar Kartelj1, S. V. Stankovi1, Comparison ofalgorithms fortherecognition ofchatgpt paraphrased texts, Journal of Big Data Published by Springer Nature (2025) 1–7.
• T. T. V. A. Bui, T. T. U., The impact of ai writing tools on academic integrity: Unveiling english-majored students, Perceptions and Practical Solutions. AsiaCALL Online Journal (2025) 83–110.
• K. H. R. H. Mohamed Oubibia, Enhancing postgraduate digital academic writing prociency: the interplay of articial intelligence tools and chatgpt, Interactive Learning Environments (2025).
• N. N. T. . P. N. K. H. Nguyen, T. Y. P., The challenges of applying chatgpt in the academic writing of postgraduate students in english major at iuh, International Journal of AI in Language (2025) 20–37.
• M. Faisal, Perceived using paraphrasing tool quillbot on students writing skills (doctoral dissertation, UIN Ar-Raniry Fakultas Tarbiyah dan Keguruan (2025).