AI tools like ChatGPT are redefining manuscript editing for global researchers, promising affordability and speed. However, a recent PLOS ONE study raises concerns about their impact on equity in scientific publishing. While ChatGPT made significantly more corrections than a human editor, its accuracy was questioned; only 61% of edits improved text quality. With English as the dominant academic language, non-native speakers face structural inequities, often spending up to 51% more time on writing. Professional editing is costly, affecting representation in scholarly literature. Although AI like ChatGPT offers advanced editing capabilities, it can inadvertently delete crucial information and introduce biases. The study emphasizes the need for rigorous evaluation of AI efficacy in editing to ensure it enhances rather than hinders research communication. Researchers should approach AI tools cautiously, prioritizing genuine improvements and preserving author intent. For a detailed exploration, refer to the full study at PLOS ONE.
Source link
Share
Read more