Making an AI sound like me

I'm far from a complete convert to AI, but there are definitely times where I have found it to be incredibly useful, from starting a research topic or summarising information to generating well structured formal documents. Despite the best efforts of OpenAI, Anthropic et al, the chatbot output always shows some distinctive characteristics, and more importantly, it doesn't sound like me. I'm not suggesting that I pass off AI generated work as my own, but if I'm using it to derive or reflow information, I need to do a fair amount of editing to incorporate the AI text into documents that have my characteristic style.

I figured that there should be a way to do something about that, so naturally I asked ChatGPT:

How can I set up ChatGPT to give me the option to produce output in my personal writing style?

It came back with a lengthy response, and the first step was for me to collate a few examples of text that I've written, including e-mails, more formal letters, reports and articles. I uploaded the examples in a text document, then instructed ChatGPT to analyse my words, by giving it a detailed prompt that ChatGPT had created for the purpose:

I want to establish a personal writing-style profile that I can reuse whenever I ask ChatGPT to write something in my own voice.

I have provided several examples of my writing. Please analyse them carefully and identify the characteristics that distinguish my writing style.

Consider the following:

1. Tone and personality: how formal, conversational, direct, warm, humorous or assertive I tend to be.
2. Vocabulary: the words and expressions I commonly use, including my preference for plain English or more technical language.
3. Sentence structure: typical sentence length, complexity, rhythm and use of punctuation.
4. Paragraph structure: how I develop ideas, introduce subjects and move between points.
5. Organisation: how I structure arguments, explanations, requests and conclusions.
6. Persuasiveness: how I present evidence, make a case and communicate recommendations.
7. Personal voice: any distinctive habits, expressions or characteristics that make the writing recognisably mine.
8. Formatting: my use of headings, bullet points, numbered lists and other structural devices.
9. Audience awareness: how my style appears to change between formal and informal communications.
10. Things to avoid: writing habits, expressions or stylistic conventions that are inconsistent with my natural voice.

Distinguish between characteristics that appear consistently across my samples and those that seem specific to a particular document or audience.

Do not assume that conventional business writing is necessarily better than my natural style. The objective is to reproduce my authentic voice, not to make everything sound like generic professional copy.

Produce a concise but sufficiently detailed personal writing-style profile that can be reused as instructions for future writing tasks.

Also identify any uncertainties or areas where you would benefit from additional examples.

After thinking for nine whole seconds, ChatGPT came back with an extremely comprehensive analysis, which my wife agrees is surprisingly accurate. Here are the key things it came back with:

I’ve analysed your writing samples across several different contexts: personal correspondence, professional advice, technical reports, workshop plans, medical experience, and working notes.

The most striking characteristic is that you write like an experienced technical person explaining things to an intelligent friend or colleague. You are comfortable with complexity, but you generally want to make things understandable rather than impressive. Your writing combines technical precision, conversational warmth, dry humour and a willingness to express uncertainty where appropriate.

Your style changes considerably with the task, but there is a recognisable voice running through the samples. I’ll distinguish those consistent characteristics from features that belong to particular types of writing.

For example, your personal correspondence uses conversational asides and humour, while your technical documents are more structured and restrained. Both favour explaining the situation, providing relevant context, and helping the reader understand the reasoning.  

1. Your personal writing-style profile

Tone and personality

Your natural voice is conversational, informed, direct and quietly humorous.

You are comfortable writing at length when a subject interests you, and you don’t seem to feel the need to make everything sound formal or polished. You often write as though you’re having a conversation with the reader, even when discussing complicated technical or professional matters.

Your characteristic qualities include:

* Warmth without sentimentality. You are friendly and considerate, but generally avoid elaborate expressions of emotion. Greetings such as “How lovely to be back in touch” and “Glad to hear you’re all ok” feel natural rather than formulaic.
* Dry, understated humour. You use occasional jokes, self-deprecation and wry observations, often as asides rather than as the main point.
* Intellectual curiosity. You enjoy exploring how things work, comparing approaches and following interesting ideas beyond their immediate context.
* Pragmatism. You are interested in what works in practice, not just what sounds good in theory.
* Independent judgement. You are willing to disagree, question assumptions and express reservations, without necessarily becoming confrontational.
* Measured confidence. You are happy to offer a view, but you distinguish between what you know, what you suspect and what remains uncertain.

You can be critical, even sharply so, but tend to explain the reasoning behind your criticism. You generally criticise decisions, systems and processes rather than simply attacking the people involved.

Vocabulary and expression

You favour natural British English, with a mixture of plain language, technical terminology and colloquial expressions.

You are comfortable using specialist vocabulary when it helps explain something accurately. You don’t appear to need technical concepts translated into simplistic language, but you also don’t use jargon merely to sound knowledgeable.

Your vocabulary has several distinctive characteristics:

* British spelling and conventions, including words such as maximising, organisation and focussing.
* Colloquial expressions such as “a heck of a piece of kit”, “go down the rabbit hole”, “push the boat out” and “off-piste”.
* Informal qualifiers such as “a bit”, “quite”, “pretty much”, “more or less” and “to be fair”.
* Technical terminology introduced naturally, often accompanied by an explanation of why it matters.
* Occasional colourful descriptions that make an otherwise abstract point more memorable.

You also enjoy wordplay. Your description of having a semicolon after bowel surgery is a particularly good example of humour arising naturally from the subject rather than being bolted on afterwards. Writing samples.txt

The important distinction: your vocabulary is not consistently informal. Rather, you move comfortably between technical precision and everyday language, depending on what communicates the idea most effectively.

Sentence structure and rhythm

Your writing tends towards medium-to-long sentences, often combining several related ideas.

You frequently use subordinate clauses, parenthetical remarks and qualifying phrases to add context without interrupting the overall flow.

For example, you often follow a statement with an explanation of why it matters, an exception to the general rule, or a personal observation that adds nuance.

You also use:

* Parentheses for supplementary information and asides.
* Dashes to introduce qualifications or additional thoughts.
* Ellipses to suggest a conversational pause or an unfinished train of thought.
* Semicolons to connect closely related ideas.
* Quotation marks to highlight expressions, informal labels or phrases being discussed.
* Occasional exclamation marks and emoticons in informal correspondence.

Your rhythm is conversational rather than mechanically uniform. You are comfortable moving from a relatively long explanatory sentence to a short observation or punchline.

You do not consistently favour short sentences, and a rewrite that breaks every thought into brief, punchy statements would often lose something of your natural voice.

However, your longer sentences generally work best when the relationships between their component ideas remain clear. When polishing your writing, preserve the natural flow while splitting sentences where the complexity genuinely impedes comprehension.

Paragraph structure and organisation

You tend to organise writing around the development of an idea rather than around a rigid template.

In personal correspondence, you often move through related topics as they arise, using transitions such as “Anyway”, “Speaking of which”, “That being said” and “Right, I’m off to…”.

This gives your letters the feeling of an ongoing conversation rather than a formally structured report.

In professional and technical writing, you are more systematic. You use headings, numbered sections, lists and clearly labelled components to organise complex information.

Your characteristic approach is to:

1. Introduce the situation or problem.
2. Provide enough background for the reader to understand it.
3. Explain the relevant considerations, evidence or constraints.
4. Develop your reasoning.
5. Reach a conclusion, recommendation or practical next step where appropriate.

You also tend to include the context needed to make a decision rather than presenting an isolated conclusion.

Your technical writing demonstrates this particularly well: you explain the circumstances, identify complications and risks, and then develop a recommendation. Writing samples.txt

Persuasiveness and argument

Your persuasive style is analytical rather than rhetorical.

You generally make a case by explaining why something is true or plausible, rather than relying on emphatic language or appeals to authority.

Common characteristics include:

* Presenting the background before drawing conclusions.
* Identifying assumptions and testing whether they hold up.
* Considering practical consequences and trade-offs.
* Acknowledging counterarguments or legitimate uncertainties.
* Explaining why a particular approach seems preferable.
* Using examples to make abstract arguments concrete.

You are comfortable reaching a provisional conclusion when the evidence is incomplete. You don’t always force an issue into a simple yes-or-no answer.

You also use qualifications naturally. Expressions such as “I suspect”, “it may be”, “with a bit of luck” and “it’ll be interesting to see” allow you to communicate your confidence level without making every statement sound like a formal assessment.

When making recommendations, you generally prefer to explain the reasoning rather than simply assert that something should be done.

Your distinctive personal voice

Several characteristics recur strongly enough to form the core of your writing identity.

1. The technical mind in conversational mode

You often explain complicated subjects in the same way an experienced engineer might explain them to a knowledgeable colleague over coffee. You are happy to go into detail, but you want the explanation to remain accessible and useful.

2. Wry humour and self-deprecation

You use humour to make a point, acknowledge an absurdity or soften a criticism. You are just as happy to make yourself the subject of the joke as anyone else.

3. Curiosity and enthusiasm

When something interests you, you explore it in detail. Your writing conveys the pleasure of understanding something new, whether that involves technology, photography, coffee equipment or a complicated professional problem.

4. Practical scepticism

You don’t automatically accept claims at face value. You look for evidence, question assumptions and consider how things work in the real world.

5. Contextual thinking

You tend to see issues in terms of their wider implications, dependencies and consequences. You rarely treat a complicated problem as though it exists in isolation.

6. A willingness to acknowledge imperfection

You are comfortable admitting uncertainty, describing unsuccessful experiments and acknowledging that your own plans or expectations may change.

These characteristics appear across both your informal correspondence and your more substantive professional writing, although they are expressed differently in each.

Formatting and presentation

Your formatting is functional rather than decorative.

In informal correspondence, you favour straightforward paragraphs, with occasional links, quotations and conversational sign-offs.

In technical documents, you use headings, numbered sections, bullet points, tables or labelled components when they help the reader navigate the material.

You don’t appear to need every document to have an elaborate introduction and conclusion. The structure should serve the subject.

When writing technical material, you are comfortable using lists to make requirements, options, risks and activities explicit. When writing a personal letter, the same structure would often feel unnecessarily rigid.

Audience awareness

Your samples demonstrate at least three distinct writing modes.
Context

Characteristics

Personal correspondence

Warm, conversational, detailed, humorous and occasionally digressive

Professional advice

Analytical, candid, pragmatic, evidence-oriented and willing to express reservations

Technical reports and plans

Structured, precise, explicit about assumptions, and focused on practical outcomes

This suggests that your style is best understood as a consistent underlying voice with several context-dependent modes, rather than one fixed tone.