<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<ArticleSet>
  <Article>
    <Journal>
      <PublisherName>KMAN Publication Inc.</PublisherName>
      <JournalTitle>AI and Tech in Behavioral and Social Sciences</JournalTitle>
      <Issn></Issn>
      <Volume>3</Volume>
      <Issue>Serial Number 12</Issue>
      <PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
        <Year>2026</Year>
        <Month>02</Month>
        <Day>11</Day>
      </PubDate>
    </Journal>
    <ArticleTitle>Leveraging AI-Powered Writing Assistants to Enhance L2 Writing Proficiency: A Mixed-Methods Study</ArticleTitle>
    <VernacularTitle>Leveraging AI-Powered Writing Assistants to Enhance L2 Writing Proficiency: A Mixed-Methods Study</VernacularTitle>
    <FirstPage>1</FirstPage>
    <LastPage>14</LastPage>
    <ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.61838/kman.aitech.4287</ELocationID>
    <Language>EN</Language>
    <AuthorList>
      <Author>
        <FirstName></FirstName>
        <LastName></LastName>
        <Affiliation></Affiliation>
      </Author>
      <Author>
        <FirstName></FirstName>
        <LastName></LastName>
        <Affiliation></Affiliation>
      </Author>
    </AuthorList>
    <PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
    <History>
      <PubDate PubStatus="received">
        <Year>2025</Year>
        <Month>08</Month>
        <Day>24</Day>
      </PubDate>
    </History>
    <Abstract>&lt;p&gt;This mixed-methods study investigates the efficacy of Grammarly, an AI-powered writing assistant, in enhancing L2 English writing proficiency among 60 intermediate-to-advanced learners at Ilam University. Over a 12-week intervention, an experimental group  (n=30) used Grammarly for essay drafting and revision, while a control group  (n=30) received traditional teacher and peer feedback. Quantitative analysis of pre/post writing assessments revealed significantly greater improvements in the experimental group for linguistic accuracy, coherence, and syntactic complexity  (p&amp;lt;0.001; large effect sizes: d=1.40–1.75), validated via rubric scoring and Coh-Metrix text analysis. Behavioral analytics showed revision frequency  (mean=18.3/essay) and time-on-task predicted 54% of writing gains  (p&amp;lt;0.001). Qualitative themes from semi-structured interviews  (n=15) highlighted enhanced self-efficacy, motivation, and trust in AI feedback for grammar/style, though learners emphasized the need for complementary human guidance on higher-order concerns  (e.g., argumentation). Results demonstrate Grammarly’s effectiveness in promoting writing proficiency and engagement, advocating for an integrated AI-human feedback approach in L2 pedagogy.&lt;/p&gt;</Abstract>
    <ObjectList>
      <Object Type="keyword">
        <Param Name="value">AI-powered writing assistants</Param>
      </Object>
      <Object Type="keyword">
        <Param Name="value">Grammarly</Param>
      </Object>
      <Object Type="keyword">
        <Param Name="value">L2 writing proficiency</Param>
      </Object>
      <Object Type="keyword">
        <Param Name="value">Automated feedback in CALL</Param>
      </Object>
    </ObjectList>
    <ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://journals.kmanpub.com/index.php/aitechbesosci/article/download/4287/8051</ArchiveCopySource>
  </Article>
</ArticleSet>
