Let's be honest - AI is writing a significant portion of the content we all consume today. The question isn't whether marketers are using AI writing tools (they are), but whether they're using them skillfully enough to avoid the robotic patterns that readers can sense, even if they can't always identify.
In our marketing roles, we see AI-generated content daily - from emails to social posts to full articles. Some of it blends seamlessly with human writing, while other pieces practically scream "I was created by a machine!" The difference isn't usually the AI tool itself but how effectively it's being prompted and edited.
After reviewing hundreds of AI-written pieces, we've identified consistent fingerprints that signal artificial creation - structural patterns, transitional phrases, and word choices that rarely appear in natural human writing. These telltale signs matter because they create subtle disconnection with readers. Content that feels manufactured typically sees lower engagement, even when the information itself is valuable.
Understanding AI writing patterns can help you prompt AI to avoid them and edit AI-generated copy to sound more human.
Excessive Use of Transitional Phrases
We've found that AI writers often cling to transitional phrases like a nervous public speaker relies on "um" and "ah." In our review of AI-written content, the overuse of phrases like "moreover," "furthermore," "additionally," and "in addition" stands out immediately. Human writers typically vary how they connect ideas, often letting relationships between thoughts emerge naturally without explicit signposting. AI, however, seems programmed to connect every paragraph and sometimes even sentences with these formulaic bridges.
The issue isn't just frequency but lack of variety. Where human writers might use subtle transitions or context clues to move between ideas, AI systems repeatedly fall back on the same limited set of connectors. This pattern creates what we call the "moreover effect" - content that technically flows but lacks the natural cadence of human thought.
These overused transitions ultimately interrupt rather than enhance flow. They signal to readers that they're consuming something formulaic rather than engaging with a genuine perspective.
How Humans Actually Write: "Social media gives businesses direct access to their customers in ways traditional marketing never could. You can talk to your audience in real time, see what they care about, and track which messages resonate. Most businesses we work with find these insights alone worth the investment.”
Vague Intensifiers and Superlatives
Another easy-to-spot pattern is the overreliance on empty intensifiers. AI loves to describe things as "very important," "incredibly useful," or "extremely effective" without actually substantiating these claims. We've found that many AI writing tools seem programmed to sprinkle these intensifiers throughout text as if more adjectives automatically create more impact. In reality, they do the opposite.
Overuse of superlatives is also a common problem. AI-written pieces frequently describe products or concepts as "the best solution," "the most effective approach," or "the leading provider" without offering any supporting evidence or comparisons. These unearned superlatives immediately trigger skepticism in readers.
This pattern stems from AI's tendency to mimic promotional copy, where empty hype is common. But audiences have grown increasingly sensitive to this language pattern, associating it with low-quality automated content rather than thoughtful human expertise.
How Humans Actually Write: "Our software helped Company X process customer returns in about half the time it took them before. Instead of manually reconciling inventory across three systems, they now manage everything from one dashboard. For businesses handling more than 100 returns weekly, this kind of automation makes a noticeable difference.”
Awkward or Excessive Repetition
AI systems often struggle to track what they've already said, leading to the same concept appearing multiple times with slightly different wording. This issue becomes particularly apparent in longer pieces. When we analyze AI-written articles, we find sentences that essentially make the same point several times throughout the text, sometimes just paragraphs apart. Humans typically remember what they've written and avoid this circular repetition.
The sentence structure itself can become predictable. AI tends to fall into patterns like "X is important because..." followed by "Another key aspect of X is..." creating a monotonous rhythm that human writers instinctively vary. Readers quickly develop pattern fatigue when exposed to these repetitive structures.
Power words create another repetition problem. Terms like "essential," "revolutionary," and "game-changing" might appear dozens of times in a single AI-generated piece. We've counted as many as 15 instances of "crucial" in a 1000-word article – something no human editor would allow to pass.
Awkward keyword stuffing also stands out. Where human writers find creative ways to incorporate important terms, AI often defaults to unnaturally forcing keywords into sentences, creating phrases like "when utilizing effective communication strategies, the effective communicator effectively communicates" – technically correct but stylistically jarring.
How Humans Actually Write: "Clear communication can make or break a team. We've seen projects derail when assumptions go unchecked, and we've watched struggling teams turn around after implementing simple check-in protocols. The difference often comes down to whether people feel safe asking questions when they're confused.”
Clichéd or Generic Phrasing
Hollow, marketing-speak phrases that immediately signal machine authorship. These stock phrases appear with surprising frequency when AI tries to sound authoritative without having actual insights to share. The "gamechanger" problem is perhaps the most obvious. When we see content describing something as "a gamechanger," "the next big thing," or declaring that "X is here to stay," we're almost always looking at AI output. Human writers with genuine expertise tend to be more specific about exactly how and why something matters.
Empty growth claims are another red flag. AI loves to state that technologies or trends "have seen explosive growth" or are "rapidly gaining traction" without substantiating these claims with actual metrics or timeframes.
How Humans Actually Write: "Most businesses try the same basic social media tactics and get mediocre results. We took a different approach with our client's Instagram account. Instead of posting broadly appealing content three times a week, we narrowed in on just one customer problem and addressed it daily for a month. Their engagement tripled, and more importantly, product demo requests went up 26%.”
Odd or Irrelevant Statements
One of the more subtle signs of AI-generated text is the presence of statements that, while grammatically perfect, somehow miss the logical mark. We've found these moments happen when an AI tries to sound knowledgeable about a topic it doesn't fully comprehend. In our content reviews, we've spotted sentences like "The blockchain technology securely encrypts emails with maximum efficiency," which sounds plausible until you realize it's mixing unrelated technical concepts. Human experts rarely make these category errors because they have contextual understanding AI lacks.
The misuse of idioms and analogies is another giveaway. When we first started working with AI tools, we reviewed an AI-generated draft that described a marketing strategy as "the cream of the crop that kills two birds with one stone while reinventing the wheel" – a bizarre mixed metaphor no human writer would construct. AI often deploys these expressions without understanding their actual meaning or appropriate context.
Perhaps most telling are the contradictions that appear within the same piece. We've seen AI content claim a particular approach is "cost-effective" early in an article, only to later describe it as "requiring significant upfront investment" without acknowledging the apparent contradiction. Human writers typically maintain consistent viewpoints or explicitly address changes in perspective.
These odd statements often appear when the AI has been asked to write about niche topics or to extend content beyond its knowledge base. The system attempts to generate plausible-sounding text but lacks the domain expertise to recognize when it's making illogical connections or factual errors.
How Humans Actually Write: "Email still works because it's direct. When someone signs up for your list, you get a straight line to their inbox—no algorithm to please, no ad auction to win. We've found that even simple, text-based emails often outperform fancy graphics when the message speaks directly to a specific customer problem.”
Conclusion
After working with dozens of AI writing tools, we've found that recognizing these patterns is just the first step toward creating more authentic content. When proofing AI-written content, we recommend a targeted approach: first, slash unnecessary transitional phrases at the beginning of paragraphs. Then hunt for those "very" and "incredibly" modifiers that add nothing but fluff. Look for repetitive sentence structures and vary them intentionally with some short, punchy sentences mixed in.
These AI writing patterns aren't flaws to be eliminated completely - they're signals that your content needs more of you in it. In our experience, the most effective approach isn't rejecting AI assistance, but learning to collaborate with it. We've found the best results come when we use AI as a starting point, then deliberately humanize the output.