1887
Volume 5, Issue 1-2
  • ISSN 2590-0994
  • E-ISSN: 2590-1001
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This perspective paper considers the affordances and challenges of generative AI for linguaculturally diverse scholars in a still English-dominant academic publishing world. Chief among the questions examined is whether AI offers a viable path forward toward greater research publication equity but, at the same time, something much more fraught. In other words, the paper explores how promising the apparent equalizing potential of generative AI may be. Might, for example, generative AI offer a smoother path to visibility, but in so doing, actually make the uniqueness of diverse scholars’ contributions far less visible? The paradoxical potential of generative AI is discussed first in this paper by surveying, at this particular phase of AI development, some of the salient advantages of generative AI use for research prewriting, writing, and post-writing, that is, AI’s ability to assist with such essentials as idea generation, text development, and text refinement. The apparent democratizing advantages of AI for each of these major stages of research writing are then interrogated and problematized. The paper concludes with a brief speculative path forward.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.00025.bel
2025-01-17
2025-02-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aguilar, G.
    (2024) Rhetorically training students to generate with AI: Social justice applications for AI as audience. Computers and Composition, 711, Article 102828. 10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102828
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102828 [Google Scholar]
  2. Amano, T., Ramirez-Castañeda, V., Berdejo-Espinola, V., Borokini, I., Chowdhury, S., Golivets, M., González-Trujillo, J. D., Montaño-Centellas, F., Paudel, K., White, R. L., & Verissimo, D.
    (2023) The manifold costs of being a non-native English speaker in science. PLOS Biology, 21(7), Article e3002184. 10.1371/journal.pbio.3002184
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002184 [Google Scholar]
  3. Babl, F., & Babl, M.
    (2023) Generative artificial intelligence: Can ChatGPT write a quality abstract?Emergency Medicine Australasia, 351, 809–811. 10.1111/1742‑6723.14233
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.14233 [Google Scholar]
  4. Baker, S.
    (2023, May19). China overtakes United States on contribution to research in Nature Index. Nature. PMID: 37208516. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01705-7. 10.1038/d41586‑023‑01705‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-01705-7 [Google Scholar]
  5. Barrett, A., & Pack, A.
    (2023) Not quite eye to A.I.: Student and teacher perspectives on the use of generative artificial intelligence in the writing process. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 201. Article 59. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41239-023-00427-0. 10.1186/s41239‑023‑00427‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00427-0 [Google Scholar]
  6. Barrot, J.
    (2024) ChatGPT as a language learning tool: An emerging technology report. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 291, 1151–1156. 10.1007/s10758‑023‑09711‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09711-4 [Google Scholar]
  7. Becker, B., Denny, P., Finnie-Ansley, J., Luxton-Reilly, A., Prather, J., & Antonio Santos, E.
    (2023) Programming is hard — Or at least it used to be: Educational opportunities and challenges of AI code generation. SIGCSE 2023: Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. 11 (pp.500–506). Association for Computing Machinery. 10.1145/3545945.3569759
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3545945.3569759 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bedington, A., Halcomb, E., McKee, H., Sargent, T., & Smith, A.
    (2024) Writing with generative AI and human-machine teaming: Insights and recommendations from faculty and students. Computers and Composition, 711, Article 102833. 10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102833
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102833 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S.
    (2021) On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big?InProceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT ‘21), Association for Computing Machinery, NY, NY, USA (pp.610–623). 10.1145/3442188.3445922
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922 [Google Scholar]
  10. Berg, C.
    (2023) The case for generative AI in scholarly practice. Available at SSRN 4407587, papers.ssrn.com
  11. Canagarajah, A. S.
    (1996) “Nondiscursive” requirements in academic publishing, material resources of periphery scholars, and the politics of knowledge production. Written communication, 131, 435–472. 10.1177/0741088396013004001
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088396013004001 [Google Scholar]
  12. (2022) Language diversity in academic writing: Toward decolonizing scholarly publishing. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 171, 107–128. 10.1080/17447143.2022.2063873
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2022.2063873 [Google Scholar]
  13. Cao, S., & Zhong, L.
    (2023) Exploring the effectiveness of ChatGPT-based feedback compared with teacher feedback and self-feedback: Evidence from Chinese to English translation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.01645, 2023 — arxiv.org
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Casal, J. E., & Kessler, M.
    (2023) Can linguists distinguish between ChatGPT/AI and human writing?: A study of research ethics and academic publishing. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 21, Article 100068. 10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100068
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100068 [Google Scholar]
  15. Chapelle, C. A.
    (2024) Open generative AI changes a lot, but not everything. Modern Language Journal, 1081, 534–540. 10.1111/modl.12927
    https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12927 [Google Scholar]
  16. Curry, N., Baker, P., & Brookes, G.
    (2024) Generative AI for corpus approaches to discourse studies: A critical evaluation of ChatGPT. Applied Corpus Linguistics, 41, Article 100082. 10.1016/j.acorp.2023.100082
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acorp.2023.100082 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dave, P.
    (2023) ChatGPT is cutting non-English languages out of the AI revolution. https://t.co/2I7vjt6hpG.via.@wired
  18. Farangi, M., & Nejadghanbar, H.
    (2024) Investigating questionable research practices among Iranian applied linguists: Prevalence, severity, and the role of artificial intelligence tools. System, 1251. Article 103427. 10.1016/j.system.2024.103427
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103427 [Google Scholar]
  19. Flower, L.
    (1979) Writer-based prose: A cognitive basis for problems in writing. College English, 411, 19–37. 10.58680/ce197916016
    https://doi.org/10.58680/ce197916016 [Google Scholar]
  20. Garg, R., Urs, V., Agarwal, A., Chaudhury, S., Paliwal, V., & Kumar, S.
    (2023) Exploring the role of ChatGPT in patient care (diagnosis and treatment) and medical research: A systematic review. Health Promotion Perspectives, 13(3), 183–191. 10.34172/hpp.2023.22. https://hpp.tbzmed.ac.ir
    https://doi.org/10.34172/hpp.2023.22 [Google Scholar]
  21. Geertz, C.
    (1988) Words and lives: The anthropologist as author. Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. George, A. S.
    (2023) The potential of generative AI to reform graduate education. Partners Universal International Research Journal, 21. ISSN: 2583-5602. www.puirj.com
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Girdharry, K., & Khachatryan, D.
    (2023) Meaningful writing in the age of generative artificial intelligence. Double Helix, 111. 10.37514/DBH‑J.2023.11.1.04
    https://doi.org/10.37514/DBH-J.2023.11.1.04 [Google Scholar]
  24. Godwin-Jones, R.
    (2023) Emerging spaces for language learning: AI bots, ambient intelligence, and the metaverse. Language Learning & Technology, 27(2), 6–27. https://hdl.handle.net/10125/73501
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Habibie, P.
    (2022) Early-career scholars and scholarship: A social justice perspective. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 421, 55–63. 10.1017/S0267190521000192
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190521000192 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hake, J., Crowley, M., Coy, A., Shanks, D., Eoff, A., Kirmer-Voss, K., Dhanda, G., & Parente, D.
    (2024) Quality, accuracy, and bias in ChatGPT-based summarization of medical abstracts. The Annals of Family Medicine, 221, 113–120. 10.1370/afm.3075
    https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.3075 [Google Scholar]
  27. Howarth, J.
    (2024, June11). Languages supported by ChatGPT. https://explodingtopics.com/blog/chatgpt-supported-languages
  28. Hundley, M., Pendergrass, E., Burriss, S., & Smith, B.
    (2024) Redefining writing again?InC. Moran (Ed.), Revolutionizing English education: The power of AI in the classroom (pp.141–156). Lexington Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Hutson, J.
    (2024) Rethinking plagiarism in the era of generative AI. Journal of Intelligent Communication, 41, 20–31. 10.54963/jic.v4i1.220
    https://doi.org/10.54963/jic.v4i1.220 [Google Scholar]
  30. Jacob, S., Tate, T., & Warschauer, M.
    (2023) Emergent AI-Assisted discourse: Case study of a second language writer authoring with ChatGPT. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.10903, 2023 — arxiv.org
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Jiang, F. K., & Hyland, K.
    (2024) Does ChatGPT argue like students? Bundles in argumentative essays. Applied Linguistics. Preprint. 10.1093/applin/amae052
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amae052 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kern, R.
    (2024) Twenty-first century technologies and language education: Charting a path forward. Modern Language Journal, 1081, 515–533. 10.1111/modl.12924
    https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12924 [Google Scholar]
  33. Khalifa, M., & Albadawy, M.
    (2024) Using artificial intelligence in academic writing and research: An essential productivity tool. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine Update, 51, Article 100145. 10.1016/j.cmpbup.2024.100145
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpbup.2024.100145 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kim, M., & Lu, X.
    (2024) Exploring the potential of using ChatGPT for rhetorical move-step analysis: The impact of prompt refinement, few-shot learning, and fine-tuning. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 711, Article 101422. 10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101422
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101422 [Google Scholar]
  35. Knowles, A.
    (2024) Machine-in-the-loop writing: Optimizing the rhetorical load. Computers and Composition, 711, Article 102826. 10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102826
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102826 [Google Scholar]
  36. Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B., & Zou, D.
    (2023) ChatGPT for Language Teaching and Learning. RELC Journal, 541, 1–14. 10.1177/00336882231162868
    https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231162868 [Google Scholar]
  37. Koltovskaia, S., Rahmati, P., & Saeli, H.
    (2024) Graduate students’ use of ChatGPT for academic text revision: Behavioral, cognitive, and affective engagement. Journal of Second Language Writing, 651, Article 101130. 10.1016/j.jslw.2024.101130
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2024.101130 [Google Scholar]
  38. Kubota, R.
    (2023) Another contradiction in AI-assisted second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing. 621, Article 101069. 10.1016/j.jslw.2023.101069
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2023.101069 [Google Scholar]
  39. Kuteeva, M., & Andersson, M.
    (2024) Diversity and standards in writing for publication in the age of AI — Between a rock and a hard place. Applied Linguistics, 451, 561–567. 10.1093/applin/amae025
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amae025 [Google Scholar]
  40. Lai, V., Ngo, N., Veyseh, A., Man, H., Dernoncourt, F., Bui, T., & Nguyen, T.
    (2023) ChatGPT Beyond English: Towards a comprehensive evaluation of large language models in multilingual learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.05613v1 [cs.CL]12 Apr 2023
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Li, R.
    (2024) A “Dance of storytelling”: Dissonances between substance and style in collaborative storytelling with AI. Computers and Composition, 711, Article 102825. 10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102825
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102825 [Google Scholar]
  42. Liang, W., Yuksekgonul, M., Mao, Y., Wu, E., & Zou, J.
    (2023) GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers. Patterns, 41. Article 100779. 10.1016/j.patter.2023.100779
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2023.100779 [Google Scholar]
  43. Lillis, T., & Curry, M. J.
    (2015) The politics of English, language and uptake: The case of international academic journal article reviews. AILA Review, 281, 127–150. 10.1075/aila.28.06lil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.28.06lil [Google Scholar]
  44. Lin, Z.
    (2024) Techniques for supercharging academic writing with generative AI. Nature Biomedical Engineering. 10.1038/s41551‑024‑01185‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-024-01185-8 [Google Scholar]
  45. Macknish, C.
    (2012) Understanding critical reading in an ESL class in Singapore. TESOL Journal, 21, 444–472. 10.5054/tj.2011.269747
    https://doi.org/10.5054/tj.2011.269747 [Google Scholar]
  46. Mollick, E.
  47. Moorhouse, B., Yeo, M., & Wan, Y.
    (2023) Generative AI tools and assessment: Guidelines of the world’s top-ranking universities. Computers and Education Open, 51, Article 100151. 10.1016/j.caeo.2023.100151
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2023.100151 [Google Scholar]
  48. Noy, S., & Zhang, W.
    (2023) Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative artificial intelligence. Science, 3811, 187–192. 10.1126/science.adh2586
    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adh2586 [Google Scholar]
  49. Odri, G., & Yoon, D.
    (2023) Detecting generative artificial intelligence in scientific articles: Evasion techniques and implications for scientific integrity. Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research, 1091, Article 103706. 10.1016/j.otsr.2023.103706
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2023.103706 [Google Scholar]
  50. Pedersen, I.
    (2023) The rise of generative AI and enculturating AI writing in postsecondary education. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 61, Article 1259407. 10.3389/frai.2023.1259407
    https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1259407 [Google Scholar]
  51. Pfau, A., Polio, C., & Xu, Y.
    (2023) Exploring the potential of ChatGPT in assessing L2 writing accuracy for research purposes. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 21, Article 100083. 10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100083
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100083 [Google Scholar]
  52. Pigg, S.
    (2024) Research writing with ChatGPT: A descriptive embodied practice framework. Computers and Composition, 711, Article 102830. 10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102830
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102830 [Google Scholar]
  53. Ranade, N., & Eyman, D.
    (2024) Introduction: Composing with generative AI. Computers and Composition, 711, Article 102834. 10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102834
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102834 [Google Scholar]
  54. Sasaki, M.
    (2023) AI tools as affordances and contradictions for EFL writers: Emic perspectives and L1 use as a resource. Journal of Second Language Writing, 621, Article 101068. 10.1016/j.jslw.2023.101068
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2023.101068 [Google Scholar]
  55. Shopovski, J.
    (2024) Generative artificial intelligence, AI for scientific writing: A literature review. https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202406.0011/v1. 10.20944/preprints202406.0011.v1
    https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202406.0011.v1
  56. Si, C., Yang, D., & Hashimoto, T.
    (2024) Can LLMs generate novel research ideas? A large-scale human study with 100+ NLP researchers. arXiv preprint arXiv. 10.48550/arXiv.2409.04109
    https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2409.04109 [Google Scholar]
  57. Soler, J.
    (2021) Linguistic injustice in academic publishing in English: Limitations and ways forward in the debate. Journal of English for Research Publication Purposes, 21, 160–171. 10.1075/jerpp.21002.sol
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jerpp.21002.sol [Google Scholar]
  58. Stokel-Walker, C., & Van Noorden, R.
    (2023) What ChatGPT and generative AI mean for science. Nature, 614(7947), 214–216. 10.1038/d41586‑023‑00340‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00340-6 [Google Scholar]
  59. Su, Y., Lin, Y., & Lai, C.
    (2023) Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing classrooms. Assessing Writing, 571, Article 100752. 10.1016/j.asw.2023.100752
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100752 [Google Scholar]
  60. Thorne, S. L.
    (2024) Generative artificial intelligence, co-evolution, and language education. Modern Language Journal, 1081, 567–572. 10.1111/modl.12932
    https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12932 [Google Scholar]
  61. Trust, T., Whalen, J., & Mouza, C.
    (2023) Editorial: ChatGPT: Challenges, opportunities, and implications for teacher education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 23(1), 1–23. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/222408/
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Ventayen, R.
    (2023) Let’s ask the authors! ‘Did you use generative AI to write your manuscript?’Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=454720810.2139/ssrn.4547208
    https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4547208 [Google Scholar]
  63. Warschauer, M., Tseng, W., Yim, S., Webster, T., Jacob, S., Du, Q., & Tate, T.
    (2023) The affordances and contradictions of AI-generated text for writers of English as a second or foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 621, Article 101071. 10.1016/j.jslw.2023.101071
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2023.101071 [Google Scholar]
  64. Washington, J.
    (2023) The impact of generative artificial intelligence on writer’s self-efficacy: A critical literature review. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=453804310.2139/ssrn.4538043
    https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4538043 [Google Scholar]
  65. Zheng, H., & Zhan, H.
    (2023) ChatGPT in scientific writing: A cautionary tale. The American Journal of Medicine, 136(8),725–726.e6. 10.1016/j.amjmed.2023.02.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2023.02.011 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.00025.bel
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): academic publishing; EAL; Generative AI; research writing
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error