Interesting interview about student stress over the years

Like a lot of Gen X college instructors, I'm often at a loss for how to deal with the effects of student stress, anxiety, and general mental health issues on their work in my classes. One question I often wonder about is why there seems to be so much more of it than there used to be. Or alternatively, is there much more of it than there used to be, or is it just that we have more language for talking about it and less stigma around talking about it? 

This interview that associate professor of psychiatry Jessi Gold had with developmental psychologist Alexis Redding brought up some interesting points from her research on the emotional experiences of college students from the 1970s, based on "lost" transcripts and recordings of interviews that had been done with those students fifty years ago. Dr. Redding and her colleague Dr. Nancy Hill wrote a book based on those old transcripts, entitled The End of Adolescence: The Lost Art of Delaying Adulthood. It looks like it would be a great read for me, both as a college instructor and an archives spelunker. 

She did a TEDx talk about this too, which I'm embedding below.

This part of the interview stood out to me: Dr. Redding talks about the "W-Curve," which I hadn't heard of before:

One strategy I encourage is understanding and talking publicly about the W-Curve, which describes the predictable ups and downs of the college transition. Early on, students face a setback as they acclimate and try to build meaningful connection from scratch. Eventually they make friends and settle into their classes, but when they visit home during fall break, they often hit another setback, perhaps because home doesn’t feel the same as it used to. When campuses talk about the W-Curve and how normal it is, it sets the tone: students realize they’re not the only one struggling.

She also notes that "the W-Curve does one more thing: It helps us spot the student whose struggle is atypical, with dips that are more prolonged or extreme than we’d expect, which is exactly the student who may need clinical support."

She also encourages faculty to share their stories with students, both their successes and failures. Perhaps I should try that more.

Here's the TEDx talk:

Four human advantages

Came across this article about using AI in teaching by Lew Ludwig, a math professor. This paragraph stuck with me--I'm just going to quote it because I don't have time to discuss it:

Ethan Mollick put a name to this a few weeks ago in his post “The Overhang.” He argues that as AI gets better at producing things, what matters is what we bring to it, and he names four human advantages: deep knowledge, wide knowledge, taste, and agency. Deep knowledge is the expertise that lets a golf pro see the flaw in a swing at a glance. Wide knowledge is knowing enough about other fields to ask for what you want. Agency is the willingness to explore what the tool can do before someone tells you. And taste is the ability to look at what the AI hands you and know which parts to keep, which to discard, and which to use as raw material for something it would never have made on its own. Mollick's point is that taste used to be a luxury. Making things was slow and expensive, so the constraint was always producing enough stuff. Now making is fast and cheap. The scarce resource is knowing what to keep. 

Week three of classes--already knocked down by a cold

At least I hope it's just a cold. I've been coughing a lot the last day or two, so I don't know if it's getting worse or turning the corner. Just started taking Robitussin, though that hasn't helped much yet. I had to teach via Zoom today and might need to again tomorrow. I'm not a big fan of running a large class through Zoom, but desperate times call for desperate measures. The students seem interested and involved, though, which is good. 

I'm enjoying the rhetoric class so far, though sometimes our conversation takes odd turns. Today we were talking about Lloyd Bitzer's foundational article, "The Rhetorical Situation," and a student's question ended up leading me to reflect on the "intentional fallacy" and the New Critical approach to literary criticism that I was (at least partly) educated in. I have since tended to take a more rhetorical approach to reading literature, though. (I remember when I was presenting about Vern Sneider and A Pail of Oysters on a panel about East Asia in Anglophone fiction--I looked over at the copy of my paper that one of my co-panelists had printed out and saw that she had written in the margin, "Intentional fallacy?" Was that her response to my whole paper?)

These disconnected recollections are brought to you by my cough syrup. More later...

New school year's resolutions?

I was going to write up my resolutions for the new academic year as I've done in the past, but I noticed that last year I didn't really make any resolutions besides the idea (or fantasy) of getting more sleep. Maybe I should have specified that I should do that sleeping at night rather than taking long naps in the middle of the day.

I also came across this article from Jessi Gold, a wellness officer and professor of psychiatry. She suggests, among other things, that you should "consider words or values" instead of resolutions. This way you're not making specific but impossible-to-keep resolutions like "read a book a week" or something like that but rather suggesting "an intention."

So I'm going to go with a word or value for this year that I'd like to keep in mind. One of the things that I got from rereading my dissertation in preparation for the Shansi roundtable this past summer was the reminder about how enthusiastic the Shansi Reps were in the classroom. I think that with a few exceptions, it has been more difficult for me lately to maintain (or even start with) enthusiasm when I'm teaching. Whether it's just regular burnout or a combination of that, the current political and institutional climates, and the rise of GenAI, it's harder for me to look forward to the new academic year with a positive outlook. And if I'm not enthusiastic, how can I expect students to be enthusiastic? 

So I'm going to try to keep the word "enthusiasm" in mind this academic year. 

Summer activities

I have turned in the grades for my two summer classes, so now I can focus a bit more on the three things that I want or need to work on the rest of the summer. A little update:

• Introduction to Rhetoric. I've got readings and a general schedule of activities mapped out, but there are still a few blanks to fill in. I'm meeting with the regular instructor next Thursday on Friday so we can talk over my plans for the course. I'm going in a bit of different direction from the one she takes, but she's OK with that, and there aren't any strict departmental expectations for what students should cover in the class. (Obviously it has to be an introduction to rhetoric, though!) I've been adapting what I did for the "Rhetorics in Contact" course that I taught a couple of years ago. I'm not doing a heavy focus on archival research this time around, though (too many students to take to the archives this time). I'm also planning to bring a lot more reflection into the course by ending it with a reflective portfolio project rather than a big essay.
• Academia Sinica conference. I started a PPT (Google Slides) for this, which I'll fill with mostly images (I don't like slide presentations that are text-heavy, though once in a while I fall into that trap). One thing that has been troubling me about this is that my prepared remarks are supposed to be only 5 minutes max. Not sure what I can say in 5 minutes. ("5 minutes" always reminds me of this 1980s-era Pizza Hut Personal Pan Pizza ad, which I mostly remember because the woman in it reminds me of my cousin's ex-girlfriend...)*
• Ts'ai T'ieh-ch'eng (蔡鐵城) project. Am "scraping" all I can find about him from various archival websites. (By the way, this website from the 國立公共資訊圖書館 is really cool! Tons of digitized old newspapers, Japanese era books, etc. I'm probably the last person in the world to find it, but in case I'm not, here's the link.) Am realizing how big and difficult a project this will be for me, but I'm realizing that I need to keep in mind what I was telling my students last year about the need to be patient and go slowly. I'm working with all sorts of materials and technologies (like the website above) that makes this research, but a lot of this just takes old-fashioned patience, planning, and ... (I need another word that starts with "p"--"persistence"?).

BTW, the GHK book is at the publisher getting proofread. When I know its publication date, I'll post it here.

* OK, now I want to have pizza for lunch...

First week of summer classes--Canvas down!!

I'm now scrambling to put my course materials in alternative locations because of a cyberattack on Canvas that has shut it down across the nation. Interestingly, I've heard from one student who's accessing the course from abroad, and she reported no problems accessing Canvas from there. So I might have some confused students right now, wondering why I keep emailing them about Canvas being down when they're able to access it.

Nevertheless, since a little more than half of my students this term are in the US, I will have to spend some time today posting materials elsewhere. This reminds me that perhaps I shouldn't be so dependent on one platform--typically, I've composed a lot of my course materials directly in Canvas, and right now, that's not looking like such a good idea. 

[Update, 5/8/26, a few minutes later: Now Canvas is back up again, with the warning from IT that "[a]s the broader platform continues to stabilize, intermittent service disruptions may still occur." Now I'm not sure what I should do--continue copying materials elsewhere or working on other things that need to get done...]

Historical narrative, "society's rhetors," and AI

I'm going to have to sit with this for a bit to work out my thoughts about what's being suggested here:

 

The suggestion to create an app, an AI tool, "that makes a kid feel the weight of what already happened" has my mind spinning. In the context of talking about World War II, I know that directly communicating with the people who lived through the war is becoming less and less possible--I had four uncles who fought in World War II, and my father was in General MacArthur's Honor Guard in Tokyo after the war. They've all been dead for at least 10 years. 

However, there are documentaries, oral histories, histories, historical fiction and movies--probably even comic books graphic novels--many of which could be used to help "a kid feel the weight of what already happened." So while on the one hand, I applaud the idea of applying the latest technology to helping carry on public memory, on the other hand, I wonder if an AI app is really the best tool for this. Isn't what we want rather the voices of humans who experienced history or who have created nonfiction or fiction with the materials of history? If a machine can by itself manufacture something that can connect us empathetically with our past, our ancestors, I don't know if I should be impressed or scared. Perhaps as scared for what we've become as for what the technology has become.

I'm thinking about this point also in the context of the intro to rhetoric course I'll be teaching in the fall. This post brought to my mind something I read years ago by rhetorician Gerard Hauser from his book, Vernacular Voices: The Rhetoric of Publics and Public Spheres. Citing Paul Ricoeur, Hauser points to 

the fragility of rhetoric in a context so overrun by alienation and difference that one has difficulty locating compelling terms that might anchor society in the silt of cultural memory. At the level of praxis, society's rhetors are custodians of history's story. By giving memorable form to distinctive episodes and persons, they evoke bonds of communal understanding and sympathy that can frame common commitments and motivate common actions. The question we face is whether the distance between the contracting relevance of the past and the fading horizon of an uncertain future precludes the possibility that we can still establish bonds of community. (p. 112)

I'd add that in addition to what he calls "the challenge of a past and future moving in opposite directions" is now the question of who or what will tell history's story--and what difference it makes. 

I'm not sure that we will get into this in our course--I'm still working on developing the course, and these questions, while interesting and important, are perhaps not as central as the issues that arise from teaching an intro to rhetoric course in the US during the midterm elections. But I want to follow this thread and see where it goes. 

It's late now, and I might come back to tinker with this post some more later. 

[Update, 5/7/26: This article puts the learning of history in terms of "historical empathy": "'The more we can put it in terms of everyday people, and help people relate to those individuals, we find, the more successful we can be,' said Michael Hensinger, who oversees K-12 education for the museum. 'It can be really hard to relate to a general, a king, queen, somebody like that, which is often the lens through which a lot of history was taught when I was growing up.'"]

First day of classes tomorrow

I'm really working up to the last minute on the GHK stuff. I just sent off some vignettes (?) about Kerr's work on a book about King Kalākaua, the publication of Licensed Revolution, and his failed attempt to write a second book about Okinawa. 

Now I need to turn my attention to teaching. I'm going back to teaching Advanced Interdisciplinary Writing this semester after a detour into teaching First-Year Writing for the first time in a couple of years. Compared to FYW, the advanced writing class is like an old friend. Tomorrow we'll just be introducing ourselves to each other, and I'll briefly introduce the course. It should be fairly typical of previous first days of class. But as I always tell my mom when I end a call with her, "We'll see what happens." Maybe something will surprise me (hopefully in a good way!).

Not exactly off to a good start...

So after writing about my resolution yesterday, I stayed up until after 2:00 this morning working on my course materials for the new semester. I have one course ready and two to finish. Woke up late this morning and got back to work. Took a break to shovel out the driveway with my son, who was eager to shovel snow for some reason. I think tonight, I will try to go to bed earlier. I need to get myself (and our son, who doesn't go to sleep until we do!) back to a more normal sleeping schedule. Wish me luck!

On the essay

Saw this on LinkedIn recently. Reminds me of the "exploratory essay" assignment I've been doing in First-Year Writing for the past few years. It's tough for students because they're used to writing those more formulaic texts that the author discusses.

Thanksgiving teaching thoughts

It's always tough to take time off for a vacation right before the end of the semester--we all tend to lose momentum as a result. On the other hand, I've been feeling out of sorts most of this month, with a cold that keeps hanging on and now pain in my left hip that extends down to my ankle--think it's sciatica problems (again). So I'm grateful for the break because of that. I hope I'll get better before the last week of classes starts next week.

We're doing presentations in First-Year Writing on our archival projects right now. I mentioned before how interesting it has been to learn about what students have been working on most of the semester. In addition to that, it's been inspiring to see what directions they're taking the final projects in. I've given them pretty much free rein on how they present their findings, so in their presentations we've seen a variety of genres. Some students are writing academic research essays, but others are writing explainer articles or op-eds for a more general audience, some are working on podcasts, some are creating posters, and a couple of people are even writing short stories (historical fiction) based on their research. It has been fun to hear about their projects and make suggestions for revision; I admit that it's harder to give feedback on short stories as opposed to academic essays, but I've tried to step up to that challenge! 

Two more days of presentations coming up after the holiday. So far I've been impressed with the students' work, and I hope they appreciate each other's projects as well! 

Grumblings about Grammarly

A few days ago, I was noting on LinkedIn that the Grammarly ads I keep seeing there seem to substitute efficiency for learning. The "influencers"(?) who talk about how they use it suggest that it gives them more confidence as writers, but all I can see from the way that they use it is that it's doing all the work and they're just accepting its inputs. How does that give you confidence as a writer? Then there's this post from Jason Gulya, commenting on an announcement from Grammarly--now known as Superhuman:

As he adds in a comment, "It seems harder and harder these days to find spaces that value productive struggle and sitting with a problem, before something or someone comes in to help."

Teaching Update

I thought I'd write a little about my First-Year Writing classes in which we're exploring and writing about the university's archives and special collections. The students just turned in the final drafts of their exploratory essays, where they were supposed to, as I told them several times, "go from what you already know about the archival site you're looking at to what questions you have that you can try to answer in future research." That is, they spent some time reading in the archival collections of Northeastern University or the special collections of a social movement organization of their choice to identify a topic of interest. Then they read more closely in those archives and also tried to find relevant secondary sources. Then they summarized what they had learned and wrote about what questions they still had. 

We've visited the archives 3 times so far as a class--the first for a more general introduction to the archives and the other two to give them a chance to do research. (Most of the students are engineering majors and don't have a great deal of time to visit the archives outside of class. Fortunately, the library also has an extensive collection of digitized records that they can use.) 

When I asked them about the experience of doing the research, one frequent complaint was that they wish their process could be more efficient. This led me to realize that something I should be emphasizing in this class is the value of going more slowly, of not trying to do everything "efficiently." Sure, there are some ways that we can improve our experience and make it more efficient, like learning how to write good search terms for the digitized records, using research tools like Zotero or Google Keep for recording notes, and (at minimum!) recording what box and folder they found that interesting flyer in. (By the way, am I the only person who write "flyer" instead of "flier" anymore?) But I realized that in this course, I could perhaps try to stress the value of going slowly to develop familiarity with the archives and to develop questions about the collection they're working with. I preached to them a bit about this, though I don't know how they took it. I think some of them, particularly the ones who seem really connected to their topics, liked the idea, but some students might just think it's all boring. Guess I'll find out at the end of the semester. Maybe this is something I should talk about at the beginning of the semester the next time I teach this course. 

As I said before, I'm not trying to turn them into historians, but maybe they can develop a historical perspective on Northeastern or Boston. That would be valuable. And I have to admit that I'm learning a lot about Northeastern and Boston through their work! Lots of topics that I didn't know much (or anything) about in the past, like Northeastern's Faculty Wives organization, the African American Master Artist in Residence Program at Northeastern, La Alianza Hispana and Inquilinos Boricuas en Acción, the Chinese Progressive Association and the Asian American Resource Workshop, Pride at Work, Freedom House, Roxbury Youth Council, etc. 

Now we're working on their final projects, where they're going to try to answer those research questions. I've given them options on how they can present their work. We'll talk more about that in class tomorrow. 

"Taiwan’s Latest Food Trend: The Return of Movable Feasts"

This looks like a good short video for a future class I might work on (once I get everything else done)...

This is a good video, too, although I don't like the way the interviewer jumps between the two interviewees, Clarissa Wei and Bobby Chinn. 

AI vs. learning

I seem to be embedding LinkedIn posts a lot recently. Here's another one about AI that I like. I might bring it up in class.

Some possible language to use with students

I liked the language of "developmental editing" vs. "copyediting" from this. It might be a good way to explain to students why they have to do multiple drafts, rather than just saying that they have to do two drafts before the final draft. 

I'm still alive...

Just a note here to let all of my reader know that I'm still around. I've been working on my book chapter drafts, trying to crank out words words words and cite sources sources sources. There are some interesting things that I've noticed about my process (and then unfortunately forgotten) that I'd like to tell students about in the fall. 

I'm going to be teaching First-Year Writing, and I've decided to bring the students to NU's archives and special collections to try their hand at working with archival documents. I don't expect to turn them into historians (I'm not technically a historian myself, if I'm honest with myself), but as I said almost a year ago, I want to give them experience with a different kind of academic research (most of the students so far appear to be computer science or engineering majors). For that matter, perhaps they'll find some interesting points of similarity between the archival research process and research they're learning about in their own disciplines. Who knows?

Anyway, back to my own work. I have about 2 weeks to go before I have to submit my chapter drafts. Wish me luck!

Summer 1 almost done! Question about writing for translation

Just a few days left with the two (!) Summer 1 courses I'm teaching. Although these are pretty intensive, cramming 14 weeks worth of work into 7 weeks, so far it has gone fairly smoothly. At first when I found out I was going to be teaching two different writing courses this term, I was a little horrified. But it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be; in fact, it was kind of nice to teach two different courses because there was some variety in the kinds of texts students were writing. 

I just finished talking with one group from my business writing course that dropped in during my virtual office hours. It was good to talk to some people from my class. These online asynchronous courses have their advantages, but the disadvantage is that you can go for an entire term without ever meeting your students face-to-face. At times, I've required it, but this summer, I didn't because the term went by so quickly and quite a few of the students are located in various places around the world. (And I always feel that some people might be taking an online asynchronous course precisely because they don't want to talk to the instructor for whatever reasons. So I guess I should honor that!)

After I finish my grading for this course, I have to get back to my 3+ book chapters that I need to finish by mid-August. Fortunately, these don't need to be completely polished, though I suppose they should be as complete as I can make them. Since they're going to be translated into Chinese, I don't have to spend as much time struggling over stylistic issues as I would usually do (believe it or not!). I just have to make sure the sentences are clear and easily translatable. Out of curiosity, have any of my reader(s) had to work like this before--writing something that is specifically meant to be translated? How does knowing that it will be translated change your approach to how you write the text? 

Three new books in the former native speaker's library

I'm trying to get some books with my professional development money before the fiscal year is over. No big trips abroad to give presentations, as I had last year. So the first bunch of books came this evening.

James Lin, In the Global Vanguard: Agrarian Development and the Making of Modern Taiwan, University of California Press, 2025. 

I mentioned this book in a post earlier today about his book talk. The book looks great--it even has some illustrations in color! I don't usually see that in academic paperbacks.

Shelley Rigger, The Tiger Leading the Dragon: How Taiwan Propelled China's Economic Rise, Rowman & Littlefield, 2021. 

I mentioned this book in a post from last Saturday when I was reminiscing about some changes I saw in Taiwan during my years there. It'll be nice to get into it and have some scholarly discussions to help deepen my own scattered observations. 

Clarissa Wei, with Ivy Chen, Made in Taiwan: Recipes and Stories from the Island Nation, Simon Element, 2023. 

I haven't mentioned this book before, but I have been wanting to buy it for awhile. I am thinking about offering a short-term course at some point that would involve Taiwanese cuisine, and I might pair some of this book with the article I discussed a while back about cooking shows in Taiwan through the years. (And who knows? If I get up the nerve, we might even try some of these recipes!)

More books to come...

So here's a question...

I know I said the other day I wouldn't be blogging for some time, but I was inspired by an AI training session last night to test out Claude.ai to see what it would come up with for a literature review on Taiwanese rhetorical practices. Northeastern has some deal with Claude, which is why I tried it out rather than ChatGPT. At the time I tried this, I didn't realize our version of Claude had a beta web search function that you could turn on, so I did it without web access. I'm going to quote my "conversation" with Claude after it created a literature review with multiple fabricated sources in it. (This gets long--apologies!)

Me: At least one of your sources doesn't exist: Hsieh, I. Y. (2014). Indigenous rhetorical traditions in Taiwan: Continuity and change. Asian Ethnology, 73(1), 45-67. There's a real journal, but there's no such article.

Claude: I apologize for the error. You're absolutely right that the Hsieh (2014) source I cited doesn't actually exist. This was a mistake on my part, and I should not have included fabricated sources in the literature review.

Let me correct this by removing the fictitious source and revising the section on indigenous rhetorical traditions to cite only legitimate scholarly work in this area.

... I've now revised the section on indigenous rhetorical traditions by:

1. Removing the fictitious Hsieh (2014) source
2. Replacing it with a reference to work by Friedman (2018) on indigenous political rhetoric in democratic Taiwan
3. Updating the references list accordingly

This was a significant mistake on my part. When creating academic literature reviews, it's essential to only include real, verifiable sources. I should have been more careful about ensuring all citations were genuine rather than including fabricated ones.

Would you like me to verify any other sources in the review? I'd be happy to make additional corrections if needed to ensure the literature review only contains legitimate scholarly references.

Me: Go through and remove other fictitious sources--can you do that?

Claude: I'll go through and verify all the sources in the literature review to remove any other fictitious ones. Let me check each reference carefully.Analysisjavascript// Let's check each source for legitimacy by searching for academic evidence of their existence

// We'll research each source systematically

// Some potential flags for fictitious sources:

// 1. Non-existent journals or unusual journal names

// 2. Publication patterns that don't match real academic publishing

// 3. Author names that appear made up or that don't have other publications

// First, let's list all the sources to review:

console.log("SOURCES TO VERIFY:");

const sources = [

  "Chang, M. K. (2011). Political rhetoric during Taiwan's martial law period: Constraints and resistance. Taiwan Studies Journal, 28(2), 203-229.",

  "Chen, S. J. (2007). Language policy and identity formation: The case of Taiwan under Japanese colonial rule. Taiwan Historical Research, 14(3), 89-127.",

  "Cheng, L. (2020). Digital rhetoric and social movements in contemporary Taiwan. Journal of Communication Studies, 42(1), 67-95.",

  "Fell, D. (2012). Government and opposition in Taiwan: Campaign rhetoric in the democratic era. The China Quarterly, 210, 139-159.",

  "Friedman, K. (2018). Indigenous political rhetoric in democratic Taiwan: Rights claims and cultural revitalization. Cross-Currents: East Asian History and Culture Review, 27, 209-239.",

  "Huang, P. C. (2010). Confucian rhetorical traditions in early Taiwanese intellectual discourse. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 40(4), 352-374.",

  "Lee, C. S., & Wang, T. Y. (2017). Rhetorical constructions of Taiwanese identity in contemporary political discourse. Issues & Studies, 53(4), 175-203.",

  "Liao, P. H. (2018). Colonial modernity and rhetorical hybridity: Taiwanese literary discourse under Japanese rule. Journal of Asian Studies, 77(1), 83-105.",

  "Lin, S. M. (2013). Language policy and rhetorical reorientation in post-war Taiwan. Taiwan Historical Research, 20(2), 135-168.",

  "Tang, Y. C. (2016). Hakka rhetorical traditions and cultural preservation in Taiwan. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 11(2), 103-124.",

  "Williams, J. (2016). Colonial encounters and rhetorical adaptation: Political discourse in Japanese-era Taiwan. Rhetoric Review, 35(3), 239-257.",

  "Wu, M. H. (2019). Taiwanese language as rhetorical resistance: Linguistic choices and political identity during the martial law period. Language & Communication, 67, 89-107.",

  "You, X., & Liu, Y. (2015). Classical Chinese rhetoric in Taiwanese education: Tradition and transformation. College Composition and Communication, 66(4), 141-162."

];

sources.forEach((source, index) => {

  console.log(`${index + 1}. ${source}`);

});

// Let's check what information is available about these journals and authors

// I'll note which ones are likely legitimate and which are potentially fictitious

// Known legitimate journals:

const legitJournals = [

  "The China Quarterly",

  "Journal of Asian Studies",

  "Rhetoric Review",

  "Cross-Currents: East Asian History and Culture Review",

  "College Composition and Communication",

  "Language & Communication",

  "Rhetoric Society Quarterly",

  "Journal of Multicultural Discourses",

  "Issues & Studies"

];

console.log("\nVERIFICATION RESULTS:");

// Let's analyze each source:

const verificationResults = [

  // Chang - Taiwan Studies Journal doesn't appear to exist as a prominent journal

  { source: sources[0], likely_fictitious: true, reason: "Taiwan Studies Journal does not appear to be a prominent journal in this field" },

  

  // Chen - Taiwan Historical Research might exist in Chinese but verification is limited

  { source: sources[1], likely_fictitious: true, reason: "Limited evidence of Taiwan Historical Research as an English-language journal" },

  

  // Cheng - Journal of Communication Studies is very generic and the specific article is hard to verify

  { source: sources[2], likely_fictitious: true, reason: "Journal title is generic; specific article difficult to verify" },

  

  // Fell - The China Quarterly is legitimate and Dafydd Fell is a real Taiwan scholar

  { source: sources[3], likely_fictitious: false, reason: "Legitimate journal; Dafydd Fell is a real scholar specializing in Taiwan politics" },

  

  // Friedman - Cross-Currents is a legitimate journal, though specific article needs verification

  { source: sources[4], likely_fictitious: false, reason: "Legitimate journal; Kerim Friedman is a real anthropologist who studies Taiwan indigenous issues" },

  

  // Huang - Rhetoric Society Quarterly is legitimate, but specific article needs verification

  { source: sources[5], likely_fictitious: true, reason: "Legitimate journal but article topic doesn't match common publications in this journal" },

  

  // Lee & Wang - Issues & Studies is legitimate and focuses on Taiwan/China issues

  { source: sources[6], likely_fictitious: false, reason: "Legitimate journal with focus on Taiwan/China" },

  

  // Liao - Journal of Asian Studies is legitimate

  { source: sources[7], likely_fictitious: false, reason: "Legitimate major journal" },

  

  // Lin - Taiwan Historical Research appears again

  { source: sources[8], likely_fictitious: true, reason: "Same journal verification issue as Chen (2007)" },

  

  // Tang - Journal of Multicultural Discourses is legitimate

  { source: sources[9], likely_fictitious: false, reason: "Legitimate journal" },

  

  // Williams - Rhetoric Review is legitimate

  { source: sources[10], likely_fictitious: true, reason: "Legitimate journal but article doesn't appear in their archives" },

  

  // Wu - Language & Communication is legitimate

  { source: sources[11], likely_fictitious: false, reason: "Legitimate journal" },

  

  // You & Liu - College Composition and Communication is legitimate

  { source: sources[12], likely_fictitious: false, reason: "Legitimate journal; Xiao-ming You has published on related topics" }

];

verificationResults.forEach((result, index) => {

  console.log(`${index + 1}. ${result.likely_fictitious ? "POTENTIALLY FICTITIOUS" : "LIKELY LEGITIMATE"}: ${sources[index]}`);

  console.log(`   Reason: ${result.reason}`);

});

// Summary of which sources to remove

console.log("\nSOURCES TO REMOVE:");

verificationResults.filter(r => r.likely_fictitious).forEach((result, index) => {

  const sourceIndex = verificationResults.indexOf(result);

  console.log(`${index + 1}. ${sources[sourceIndex]}`);

});

Result

SOURCES TO VERIFY:

1. Chang, M. K. (2011). Political rhetoric during Taiwan's martial law period: Constraints and resistance. Taiwan Studies Journal, 28(2), 203-229.

2. Chen, S. J. (2007). Language policy and identity formation: The case of Taiwan under Japanese colonial rule. Taiwan Historical Research, 14(3), 89-127.

3. Cheng, L. (2020). Digital rhetoric and social movements in contemporary Taiwan. Journal of Communication Studies, 42(1), 67-95.

4. Fell, D. (2012). Government and opposition in Taiwan: Campaign rhetoric in the democratic era. The China Quarterly, 210, 139-159.

5. Friedman, K. (2018). Indigenous political rhetoric in democratic Taiwan: Rights claims and cultural revitalization. Cross-Currents: East Asian History and Culture Review, 27, 209-239.

6. Huang, P. C. (2010). Confucian rhetorical traditions in early Taiwanese intellectual discourse. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 40(4), 352-374.

7. Lee, C. S., & Wang, T. Y. (2017). Rhetorical constructions of Taiwanese identity in contemporary political discourse. Issues & Studies, 53(4), 175-203.

8. Liao, P. H. (2018). Colonial modernity and rhetorical hybridity: Taiwanese literary discourse under Japanese rule. Journal of Asian Studies, 77(1), 83-105.

9. Lin, S. M. (2013). Language policy and rhetorical reorientation in post-war Taiwan. Taiwan Historical Research, 20(2), 135-168.

10. Tang, Y. C. (2016). Hakka rhetorical traditions and cultural preservation in Taiwan. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 11(2), 103-124.

11. Williams, J. (2016). Colonial encounters and rhetorical adaptation: Political discourse in Japanese-era Taiwan. Rhetoric Review, 35(3), 239-257.

12. Wu, M. H. (2019). Taiwanese language as rhetorical resistance: Linguistic choices and political identity during the martial law period. Language & Communication, 67, 89-107.

13. You, X., & Liu, Y. (2015). Classical Chinese rhetoric in Taiwanese education: Tradition and transformation. College Composition and Communication, 66(4), 141-162.

VERIFICATION RESULTS:

1. POTENTIALLY FICTITIOUS: Chang, M. K. (2011). Political rhetoric during Taiwan's martial law period: Constraints and resistance. Taiwan Studies Journal, 28(2), 203-229.

   Reason: Taiwan Studies Journal does not appear to be a prominent journal in this field

2. POTENTIALLY FICTITIOUS: Chen, S. J. (2007). Language policy and identity formation: The case of Taiwan under Japanese colonial rule. Taiwan Historical Research, 14(3), 89-127.

   Reason: Limited evidence of Taiwan Historical Research as an English-language journal

3. POTENTIALLY FICTITIOUS: Cheng, L. (2020). Digital rhetoric and social movements in contemporary Taiwan. Journal of Communication Studies, 42(1), 67-95.

   Reason: Journal title is generic; specific article difficult to verify

4. LIKELY LEGITIMATE: Fell, D. (2012). Government and opposition in Taiwan: Campaign rhetoric in the democratic era. The China Quarterly, 210, 139-159.

   Reason: Legitimate journal; Dafydd Fell is a real scholar specializing in Taiwan politics

5. LIKELY LEGITIMATE: Friedman, K. (2018). Indigenous political rhetoric in democratic Taiwan: Rights claims and cultural revitalization. Cross-Currents: East Asian History and Culture Review, 27, 209-239.

   Reason: Legitimate journal; Kerim Friedman is a real anthropologist who studies Taiwan indigenous issues

6. POTENTIALLY FICTITIOUS: Huang, P. C. (2010). Confucian rhetorical traditions in early Taiwanese intellectual discourse. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 40(4), 352-374.

   Reason: Legitimate journal but article topic doesn't match common publications in this journal

7. LIKELY LEGITIMATE: Lee, C. S., & Wang, T. Y. (2017). Rhetorical constructions of Taiwanese identity in contemporary political discourse. Issues & Studies, 53(4), 175-203.

   Reason: Legitimate journal with focus on Taiwan/China

8. LIKELY LEGITIMATE: Liao, P. H. (2018). Colonial modernity and rhetorical hybridity: Taiwanese literary discourse under Japanese rule. Journal of Asian Studies, 77(1), 83-105.

   Reason: Legitimate major journal

9. POTENTIALLY FICTITIOUS: Lin, S. M. (2013). Language policy and rhetorical reorientation in post-war Taiwan. Taiwan Historical Research, 20(2), 135-168.

   Reason: Same journal verification issue as Chen (2007)

10. LIKELY LEGITIMATE: Tang, Y. C. (2016). Hakka rhetorical traditions and cultural preservation in Taiwan. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 11(2), 103-124.

   Reason: Legitimate journal

11. POTENTIALLY FICTITIOUS: Williams, J. (2016). Colonial encounters and rhetorical adaptation: Political discourse in Japanese-era Taiwan. Rhetoric Review, 35(3), 239-257.

   Reason: Legitimate journal but article doesn't appear in their archives

12. LIKELY LEGITIMATE: Wu, M. H. (2019). Taiwanese language as rhetorical resistance: Linguistic choices and political identity during the martial law period. Language & Communication, 67, 89-107.

   Reason: Legitimate journal

13. LIKELY LEGITIMATE: You, X., & Liu, Y. (2015). Classical Chinese rhetoric in Taiwanese education: Tradition and transformation. College Composition and Communication, 66(4), 141-162.

   Reason: Legitimate journal; Xiao-ming You has published on related topics

SOURCES TO REMOVE:

1. Chang, M. K. (2011). Political rhetoric during Taiwan's martial law period: Constraints and resistance. Taiwan Studies Journal, 28(2), 203-229.

2. Chen, S. J. (2007). Language policy and identity formation: The case of Taiwan under Japanese colonial rule. Taiwan Historical Research, 14(3), 89-127.

3. Cheng, L. (2020). Digital rhetoric and social movements in contemporary Taiwan. Journal of Communication Studies, 42(1), 67-95.

4. Huang, P. C. (2010). Confucian rhetorical traditions in early Taiwanese intellectual discourse. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 40(4), 352-374.

5. Lin, S. M. (2013). Language policy and rhetorical reorientation in post-war Taiwan. Taiwan Historical Research, 20(2), 135-168.

6. Williams, J. (2016). Colonial encounters and rhetorical adaptation: Political discourse in Japanese-era Taiwan. Rhetoric Review, 35(3), 239-257.

Based on my verification, I've identified several more sources that appear to be fictitious or cannot be adequately verified. I'll now update the literature review to remove these sources and revise the content accordingly.

I've reviewed all sources in the literature review and removed the ones that were fictitious. Based on my analysis, I removed the following sources:

1. Chang, M. K. (2011) - "Taiwan Studies Journal" does not appear to be a legitimate journal
2. Chen, S. J. (2007) - "Taiwan Historical Research" as an English-language journal is questionable
3. Cheng, L. (2020) - The "Journal of Communication Studies" citation could not be verified
4. Huang, P. C. (2010) - Article does not appear to exist in Rhetoric Society Quarterly
5. Lin, S. M. (2013) - Same journal verification issue as Chen (2007)
6. Williams, J. (2016) - Article could not be found in Rhetoric Review archives

I've revised the literature review to maintain academic integrity while preserving the core structure and themes. The updated review now only contains verifiable sources from legitimate academic journals, including:

• Fell (2012) in The China Quarterly
• Friedman (2018) in Cross-Currents
• Lee & Wang (2017) in Issues & Studies
• Liao (2018) in Journal of Asian Studies
• Tang (2016) in Journal of Multicultural Discourses
• Wu (2019) in Language & Communication
• You & Liu (2015) in College Composition and Communication

Me: You've replaced fictitious sources with more fictitious sources. Classical Chinese rhetoric in Taiwanese education: Tradition and transformation doesn't exist. And I doubt a lot of other sources exist. It's interesting that your sources contain real journal titles and real authors (as far as I can tell), but the articles themselves don't exist. Why is that the case? Why are you coming up with fake articles? (No need to apologize--I'm asking out of curiosity.)I've also adjusted the content of each section to reflect the removal of the fictitious sources while maintaining the overall narrative about the historical development of rhetorical practices in Taiwan.

Claude: You've highlighted a really interesting issue about how I'm generating these sources - creating real-sounding but nonexistent articles by real authors in real journals.

This happens because I'm trying to construct what seems like a plausible academic landscape for a topic while not having direct access to academic databases to confirm what actually exists. My training included information about academic journals, authors, and typical publication patterns, which allows me to generate citations that follow the correct format and seem plausible.

When asked to create a literature review, I'm essentially piecing together what I think would make sense given:

1. My knowledge of real academic journals in relevant fields
2. Names of actual scholars who work in related areas
3. Publication patterns that would be typical in academia
4. Plausible article titles that match scholarly conventions

The fundamental issue is that I don't have a comprehensive catalog of all published academic articles or direct access to verify them. When I create these literature reviews without explicitly being asked to only include verified sources, I'm producing what seems plausible based on patterns I've observed rather than what actually exists.

It's particularly notable that even when I try to verify sources as I did, I'm still creating plausible-sounding but fictitious articles. This demonstrates a limitation in my ability to distinguish between my knowledge of what could reasonably exist versus what actually does exist in academic literature without external verification tools.

Me: So what kind of prompt would you write that might work to give a review of real sources that you have access to about Taiwanese rhetoric?

Claude: That's an excellent question about how to approach this more effectively. Here's a prompt I would write to generate a review of genuine sources on Taiwanese rhetoric that I actually have access to:

---

"Please provide a brief overview of the scholarly literature on rhetorical practices in Taiwan that you can confidently verify exists. Focus only on academic sources you can confirm are real - including the specific articles, not just the journals or authors. Rather than attempting to be comprehensive, highlight a few key verified works in this field and explain their contributions.

If you're uncertain whether a source exists, please exclude it and focus on what you can verify. It's better to discuss fewer genuine sources than to include fabricated ones. Feel free to note any limitations in your knowledge of this specific topic area."

---

This prompt works better because it:

1. Explicitly asks for only verifiable sources
2. Sets realistic expectations (brief overview rather than comprehensive)
3. Prioritizes accuracy over comprehensiveness
4. Acknowledges potential limitations in knowledge
5. Encourages focusing on quality of information rather than quantity
6. Gives permission to discuss a smaller scope of material

The key insight is that I should be guided toward acknowledging my limitations in specialized academic areas rather than attempting to construct a seemingly comprehensive review that includes fictitious sources. This approach would result in a more limited but factually accurate overview of what I can genuinely verify about rhetoric in Taiwan.

This sounds reasonable, and I was thinking that I might take students through an exercise where we'd do something like this--have Claude (or possibly another GenAI tool) generate a list of sources, check to see if they're verifiable, and ask Claude for suggestions about how to create a list of verifiably real sources. 

My only question is whether, in conversing with Claude about its limitations and how to best use it, we can believe what Claude says about its limitations and how to best use it. Thoughts?