Perceptions and detection of AI use in manuscript preparation for academic journals

In short

Surveyed academics differed on when AI help with a manuscript should be reported, and one detector often flagged abstracts given only grammar fixes. The authors suggest reporting rules may be hard to enforce with detectors.

What it looked at

A survey of 271 academics on whether different kinds of ChatGPT use should be reported, plus a test running 2,716 published abstracts, modified with GPT in different ways, through one AI detection program.

What it means for teaching

Offers a reminder that tool flags may not separate light editing from substantial AI writing, though the setting here is journal manuscripts rather than coursework.

Limits

The survey is self-reported opinion, and the detection test used one program on published abstracts. The abstract does not say how the academics were recruited.

Cited 73 times by other papers, as counted by OpenAlex in November 2026. A count measures attention, not quality.