Disclosing generative AI use for writing assistance should be voluntary

Bibliographic Data

ID21787682
AuthorsMohammad Hosseini (0000-0002-2385-985X, Northwestern University, corresponding author), Bert Gordijn (0000-0002-3686-8659, Dublin City University), Gregory E Kaebnick (Hastings Center), Kristi Holmes (0000-0001-8420-5254, Northwestern University)
Year2025
Volume21
Issue4
Pages728-735
Publication date2025-10-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueResearch Ethics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1747-0161 • E-ISSN: 2047-6094
PublisherSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/17470161251345499
PMID40950847
OpenAlexW4411508011
LanguageEN
Citations received4
References cited17

Researchers have been using generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) to support writing manuscripts for several years now. However, as GenAI evolves and scientists are using it more frequently, the case for mandatory disclosure of GenAI for writing assistance continues to diverge from the initial justifications for disclosure, namely (1) preventing researchers from taking credit for work done by machines; (2) enabling other researchers to critically evaluate a manuscript and its specific claims; and (3) helping editors determine if a submission satisfies their editorial policies. Our initial position (communicated through previous publications) regarding GenAI use for writing assistance was in favor of mandatory disclosure. Nevertheless, as we show in this paper, we have changed our position and now support instituting a voluntary disclosure policy because currently (1) the credit due to machines for assisting researchers is moving below the threshold of requiring recognition; (2) it is impractical (if not impossible) to accurately specify what parts of the text are human-/GenAI-generated; and (3) disclosures could increase biases against non-native speakers of the English language and compromise the integrity of the peer review system. Consequently, we argue, it should be up to the authors of manuscripts to disclose their use of GenAI for writing assistance. For example, in disciplines where writing is the hallmark of originality, or when authors believe disclosure is beneficial, a voluntary checkbox in manuscript submission systems, visible only after publication (rather than a free-text note in the manuscripts) would be preferable

Business · Compromise · Generative grammar · Originality · Political science · Public relations · Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education · Computer Science · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI · Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI · Law · Psychology · Social Psychology · Artificial Intelligence

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access