Artist Statement: Show Me Who You Think I Am: Linguistic Alignment and Consent in AI Large Language Models

References

1. Barone Tom, and W. Eisner Elliot. Arts Based Research. SAGE 2012.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Beck Estee, Goin M. Ellen, Ho Andrew, Parks Alexis, Rowe Stephen. “Critical Digital Literacy as Method for Teaching Tactics of Response to Online Surveillance and Privacy Erosion.” Computers and Composition, vol. 61 2021, doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2021.102654.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Beck Estee N., Crow Angela, A. McKee Heidi, Reilly Colleen, Vie Stephanie, DeWinter Jennifer, Gonzales Laura, and Nicole DeVoss Dànielle. “Writing in an Age of Surveillance, Privacy, and Net Neutrality.” Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy, vol. 20, no. 2 2016, kairos.technorhetoric.net/20.2/topoi/beck-et-al.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Bender Emily M., Gebru Timnit, McMillan-Major Angelina, and Shmitchell Shmargaret. “On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big? 🦜” in Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, FAccT ‘21, pp. 610–23, doi:10.1145/3442188.3445922.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bjork Collin. “Extractive Artificial Intelligence and Its Challenge to Technical Communication.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, vol. 39, no. 4 2025, pp 504–15, doi:10.1177/10506519251348462.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Byrd Antonio. “Truth-Telling: Critical Inquiries on LLMs and the Corpus Texts That Train Them.” Composition Studies, vol. 51, no. 1 2023, pp 135–42.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Edwards Dustin, and Gelms Bridget. “Special Issue Introduction—The Rhetorics of Platforms: Definitions, Approaches, Futures.” Present Tense, vol. 6, no. 3 2018.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Faden Ruth R., and L. Beauchamp Tom. A History and Theory of Informed Consent. Oxford UP 1986.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Johnson Lucy Anne. “(Re)Composing Our Consent: Critical Digital Literacies as Remixed Terms of Service.” Constellations: A Cultural Rhetorics Publishing Space, 1 Oct 2020, constell8cr.com/pedagogy-blog/recomposing-our-consent-critical-digital-literacies-as-remixed-terms-of-service.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Knoeferle Pia, Möller Sebastian, Kolossa Dorothea, Solopova Veronika, Rehm Georg. “How Desirable Is Alignment between LLMs and Linguistically Diverse Human Users?” arXiv, arxiv.org/abs/2502.12884 2025 Preprint.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Littlefield Jamie. “Stochastic Publics: The Emergence and Ethics of AI-Generated Publics in Technical Communication.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, vol. 39, no. 1 2025, pp 26–41.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Manson Neil C., and O’Neill Onora. Rethinking Informed Consent in Bioethics. Cambridge UP 2007.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Menkman Rosa. The Glitch Moment(um). Institute of Network Cultures 2011.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Nissenbaum Helen. Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life. Stanford UP 2010.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Ostrand Rachel, and E. Berger Sara. “Humans Linguistically Align to Their Conversational Partners, and Language Models Should Too.” ICML 2024 Workshop on LLMs and Cognition 2024.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Russell Legacy. Glitch Feminism: A Manifesto. Verso 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Sano-Franchini Jennifer, McIntyre Megan, and Fernandes Maggie. “Refusing GenAI in Writing Studies: A Quickstart Guide.” Refusing GenAI 2024, refusinggenai.wordpress.com.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Sano-Franchini Jennifer, and Carpenter Kaytely. “Critical Digital Interface Analysis and Social Justice.” Technical Communication, vol. 70, no. 4 2023, pp 1–7.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Selfe Cynthia L., and Richard J. Selfe Jr. “The Politics of the Interface: Power and Its Exercise in Electronic Contact Zones.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 45, no. 4 1994, pp 480–504.
    [Google Scholar]