Citation guides

How to Cite ChatGPT and Other AI Tools

Official APA 7, MLA, Harvard and Chicago formats for citing ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini, plus how to write an AI disclosure statement and when you should not cite AI at all.

AI chatbots are now part of how students work, and citation styles have caught up. APA published official guidance for citing ChatGPT, and MLA and most Harvard variants have settled on workable patterns. Before formatting anything, though, there is a more important question.

First: check what your course allows

Universities differ enormously. Some ban generative AI outright, some allow it with disclosure, and some encourage it. No citation format will save an assignment that broke the rules, so read your course guide or ask your teacher first. If AI use is allowed, cite or disclose it as below.

APA citation for ChatGPT

APA treats the AI company as the author and the chatbot as the titled work, with the model version in parentheses. This is the format from APA's official guidance.

Describe the prompt you used in your running text, and consider putting the full transcript in an appendix; the conversation itself is not retrievable by your reader.

MLA citation for ChatGPT

MLA starts from the prompt (as the title of the "work"), then names the tool, version, company and date you generated the text.

Harvard citation for ChatGPT

Most university Harvard guides adapt the APA pattern with "Available at:" and an accessed date. Check your department's variant, or use the Harvard reference generator for ordinary sources and add AI entries by hand.

Claude, Gemini and Copilot

The pattern is identical for every chatbot; only the company, product and URL change.

Chicago citation for ChatGPT

Chicago's own guidance leans away from a formal bibliography entry for a chat session, since it is not something your reader can retrieve and re-read the way a webpage or article is. The recommended approach is to describe the interaction in the text or a footnote instead.

If your instructor specifically wants a bibliography entry, use the same author-title-date-URL pattern as APA and Harvard above, just formatted with Chicago's punctuation.

Difficult cases, answered

AI invented a source that does not exist

This is the failure mode that ends up in front of examiners most often. Language models generate references that look entirely plausible, with real journal names, realistic volume numbers and authors who genuinely work in the field, for papers that were never written. Never cite a reference an AI gave you without opening it yourself: search the title, check the DOI resolves, and confirm the paper says what the model claimed. A fabricated reference in your list is treated as a serious academic offence, and "the AI told me" is not a defence anywhere.

AI summarised a real source for you

Cite the source, not the AI, but only after reading the relevant part yourself. A summary you have not verified is a claim about a paper rather than knowledge of it, and summaries routinely drop the qualifications that make an academic finding defensible.

You used AI only for grammar or rewriting

No citation is normally needed for spelling, grammar or light rephrasing, in the same way you would not cite a spellchecker. Many courses still want it mentioned in a disclosure statement, and some restrict it outright for language subjects where the writing itself is being assessed. Check first.

You used AI to generate code or analysis

Say so, in the method section rather than only in a reference. Name the tool and version, state which part it produced, and describe how you tested the output. In quantitative work the reproducibility of your analysis matters more than the citation formality.

The conversation cannot be shared

A chat is not retrievable by your reader, which is why APA treats these outputs as unrecoverable and recommends putting the full prompt and response in an appendix. Some tools now produce share links; include one when it exists, because it turns an unverifiable claim into a checkable one.

Your school forbids AI entirely

Then no citation format makes it acceptable. Citing a prohibited tool documents the breach rather than excusing it. If you have already used it, tell your teacher before submitting rather than after.

Writing an AI disclosure statement

A growing number of courses ask for a short disclosure instead of, or alongside, a formal citation, even for AI use that would not otherwise need one (grammar help, brainstorming, outlining). A good disclosure names the tool and version, states exactly what it was used for, and confirms how you checked the result.

Vague statements ("AI was used to help write this") satisfy few rubrics. Specific ones, naming the tool and the exact task, hold up much better if a marker asks follow-up questions.

The golden rule for citing AI

• Cite AI when you quote or analyse its output, or when disclosure is required.
• Do not cite AI as evidence for facts; find the underlying source and cite that instead.
• Verify everything. If a chatbot names a study, open the study before it goes anywhere near your reference list.

For the sources you find while verifying, paste the link or DOI into the free citation generator and the reference formats itself.