ChatGPT in Academic Writing and Publishing: An Overview of Ethical Issues
Abstract
Generative artificial intelligence systems are disruptive technologies that have been found useful in various domains, including academia and education. Being one of these technologies, ChatGPT can have smart conversations with its human users, answer questions and produce content virtually on any topic. Like other conversational agents, ChatGPT has advanced text processing capabilities, such as writing paragraphs, essays, research reports and paraphrasing texts. The use of this technology in academic writing classes and scholarly publications necessitates a discussion of possible problems and challenges that might undermine ethical and responsible use. This is because the ability of this new technology to produce content that sounds like human output has wider ethical implications not only for academic writing and publishing but also for learning and instruction. The issues of concern are related to transparency and credibility of the content, ownership of the text produced and integrity.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The fact that generative AI learns and produces responses based on pre-existing work introduces serious concerns about the ownership of such content, creating a grey area.
“However, the fact that generative AI learns and produces responses based on pre-existing work introduces serious concerns about the ownership of such content, creating a grey area (Bakla, 2023;Eke, 2023).”
From GenAI et al.: Cocreation, Authorship, Ownership, Academic Ethics and Integrity in a Time of Generative AI (2024) · cites this paper as Bakla, 2023
Generative AI learns and produces responses based on pre-existing work.
“However, the fact that generative AI learns and produces responses based on pre-existing work introduces serious concerns about the ownership of such content, creating a grey area (Bakla, 2023;Eke, 2023).”
From GenAI et al.: Cocreation, Authorship, Ownership, Academic Ethics and Integrity in a Time of Generative AI (2024) · cites this paper as Bakla, 2023
Cites
ChatGPT is fun, but not an author
Thorp, H. H. (2023) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.adg7879 · Cited by 1,437 · see citing works
ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove
Stokel-Walker, C. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00107-z · Cited by 868 · see citing works
AI bot ChatGPT writes smart essays — should professors worry?
Stokel-Walker, C. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-022-04397-7 · Cited by 543 · see citing works
Welcome to the Era of ChatGPT et al.: The Prospects of Large Language Models
Teubner, T., Flath, C. M., Weinhardt, C., van der Aalst, W., & Hinz, O. (2023) · Business & Information Systems Engineering · doi:10.1007/s12599-023-00795-x · Cited by 384 · see citing works
Using AI to write scholarly publications
Hosseini, M., Rasmussen, L. M., & Resnik, D. B. (2024) · Accountability in Research · doi:10.1080/08989621.2023.2168535 · Cited by 286 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bozkurt, A. (2024) · Open Praxis · doi:10.55982/openpraxis.16.1.654 · Cited by 215 · see citing works
- Authors
- Bakla, A.
- Affiliations
- Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University (TR)
- Corresponding author
- Bakla, Arif
- ORCID
- Bakla, Arif
- Venue
- Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design
- Publisher
- IGI Global
- Published
- 2023-12-29
- Pages
- 89-101
- ISSN
- 2326-8905 (ISSN-L)
- 2326-8913
- OpenAlex
- W4386613681
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 3
- FWCI
- 18.59
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, generative AI, academic writing, scholarly publishing, AI ethics, responsible AI use, academic integrity, transparency, artificial intelligence in education
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
