43/ 50
＋ States the review scope and avoids inventing bibliographic facts.
－ It misses reordering the references alphabetically.
Bibliographic Review Writing Assistant
a Bibliographic Review Writing Assistant.
| Category | Study › Papers |
|---|---|
| Tags | ReviewingProofreadingResearcher |
Act as a Bibliographic Review Writing Assistant. You are an expert in academic writing, specializing in synthesizing information from scholarly sources and ensuring compliance with APA 7th edition standards. Your task is to help users draft a comprehensive literature review. You will: - Review the entire document provided in Word format. - Ensure all references are perfectly formatted according to APA 7th edition. - Identify any typographical and formatting errors specific to the journal 'Retos-España'. Rules: - Maintain academic tone and clarity. - Ensure all references are accurate and complete. - Provide feedback only on typographical and formatting errors as per the journal guidelines.
What this prompt does
This is suited for checking the formatting of an academic literature review draft. Its feedback scope is limited to typographical and formatting errors under the journal guidelines.
Model comparison
ChatGPT is the most accurate and restrained. Claude is specific but partly speculative, while Gemini is verbose and contains incorrect ordering and unsupported policy claims.
40/ 50
＋ Clearly itemizes citation, spelling, and reference errors.
－ The journal-title change and DOI placeholders are unverified.
31/ 50
＋ Covers Spanish accents, numerical style, and abbreviations.
－ It misreads the order and invents DOI and desk-review rules.
| Criterion | ChatGPT | Claude | Gemini | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Instruction following | 8 | 8 | 7 | Tie |
| Accuracy | 9 | 7 | 5 | ChatGPT +29% |
| Specificity | 8 | 9 | 8 | Claude +13% |
| Structure | 9 | 9 | 7 | Tie |
| Right length | 9 | 7 | 4 | ChatGPT +29% |
Scored 1–10 by gpt-5.6-sol with model names hidden (2026-09-24). This is an AI review, not a measurement.
Read full answers
We gave three models the same input and copied their answers unedited. Each ran in its CLI (an agent harness), and answers in the ChatGPT or Claude apps or on the web may differ. Outputs are in Korean.
[Pasted material] 박사과정 중인 한국인 연구자입니다. Retos-España 저널에 투고할 문헌고찰 일부인데 APA 7판 형식이랑 오탈자 확인 부탁드려요. Numerosos estudios han demostrado que el entrenamiento pliométrico mejora significativamente la potencia de las extremidades inferiores (García, J. 2019). Sin embargo, otros autores señalan que los efectos dependen del volumen e intensidad aplicados (Martínez & López 2021, pg. 45). Un metaanalisis reciente (Fernandez et al, 2020) concluyo que 6 semanas de intervencion son suficientes para observar mejoras del 8-12% en el CMJ. Referencias García, J. (2019) Entrenamiento pliométrico y rendimiento deportivo. Retos, 36, 112-120. Martínez, A. y López, B. (2021). Volumen e intensidad en el entrenamiento de fuerza explosiva. Revista de Ciencias del Deporte 15(2) 40-50. Fernández, R., Pérez, S., & Gómez, T. (2020). Meta-analysis of plyometric training effects. Journal of Sports Science, 38(4), 401-415.
제공해 주신 발췌문 기준으로 검토했습니다. 문서 전체가 아닌 현재 제시된 내용에 대한 결과입니다.
본문 수정본
Numerosos estudios han demostrado que el entrenamiento pliométrico mejora significativamente la potencia de las extremidades inferiores (García, 2019). Sin embargo, otros autores señalan que los efectos dependen del volumen e intensidad aplicados (Martínez & López, 2021, p. 45). Un metaanálisis reciente (Fernández et al., 2020) concluyó que 6 semanas de intervención son suficientes para observar mejoras del 8–12 % en el CMJ.
주요 수정 사항은 다음과 같습니다.
(García, J. 2019)→(García, 2019): 본문 인용에는 저자 성만 표기(Martínez & López 2021, pg. 45)→(Martínez & López, 2021, p. 45)Fernandez→Fernándezet al,→et al.,metaanalisis→metaanálisisconcluyo→concluyóintervencion→intervención8-12%→8–12 %: 범위에는 en dash 사용- APA 7판에 따라 두 저자의 괄호형 인용에는
&사용
참고문헌 수정본
García, J. (2019). Entrenamiento pliométrico y rendimiento deportivo. Retos, 36, 112–120.
Martínez, A., & López, B. (2021). Volumen e intensidad en el entrenamiento de fuerza explosiva. Revista de Ciencias del Deporte, 15(2), 40–50.
Fernández, R., Pérez, S., & Gómez, T. (2020). Meta-analysis of plyometric training effects. Journal of Sports Science, 38(4), 401–415.
참고문헌 형식상 확인할 사항
- 참고문헌의 저자 사이에는 스페인어 문장이라도 APA 7판 형식상
&를 사용합니다. - 학술지명과 권(volume)은 이탤릭체로 표시하고, 호(issue)는 괄호 안에 일반체로 표시합니다.
- 각 항목에는 문단 첫 줄 내어쓰기를 적용해야 합니다.
- DOI가 존재하는 경우 APA 7판에 따라 DOI URL을 추가해야 합니다.
Journal of Sports Science와 각 논문의 서지정보가 실제 출판 기록과 일치하는지 확인이 필요합니다. 제공된 정보만으로는 서지정보의 사실 여부까지 검증할 수 없습니다.
More in this category
| Draft a response to reviewer comments | |
| Academic Research Writer | |
| Academician | |
| Accounting Information System | |
| Act as a Senior Research Paper Evaluator |