1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Journal of English for Research Publication Purposes
  4. Volume 6, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 6, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2590-0994
  • E-ISSN: 2590-1001
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

The rise of Generative AI, notably following the release of ChatGPT in late 2022, has brought both excitement and significant challenges to academia. While some welcome its potential, others express concern, particularly around academic publishing. Mentors, already tasked with upholding ethical standards and addressing academic misconduct among mentees, find themselves in an even more demanding role as they confront the complexities introduced by AI. With academic writing for publication already a difficult skill to master, the dual challenge of integrating technological advancements while safeguarding academic integrity places additional strain on mentorship. This perspective article proposes using the Psycho-Pedagogical Model of Students’ Professional Consciousness Development (Enns & Shapovalova, 2015) as a framework to guide mentors in fostering reflective, ethically aware, and autonomous scholarly writers. Building on this model, it advocates for an approach that embraces AI as a complementary tool while reinforcing the vital human role in scholarly writing.

© 2025 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.00034.mam
2026-03-12
2026-04-21

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.00034.mam
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alaa, A. M.
    (2024) Navigating the impact: A study of editors’ and proofreaders’ perceptions of AI tools in editing and proofreading. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 4(1), 116.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Andresen, B. B.
    (2018) Learning analytics for formative purposes. InA. Tatnall & M. Webb (Eds.), Tomorrow’s learning: Involving everyone — Learning with and about technologies and computing (IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, Vol. 515, pp. 355–364). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑74310‑3_29
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74310-3_29 [Google Scholar]
  3. Andresen, K., Laursen, J., & Rosenberg, J.
    (2018) Outlining and dictating scientific manuscripts is a useful method for health researchers: A focus group interview. SAGE Open Medicine, 61, 205031211877395. 10.1177/2050312118778728
     https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312118778728 [Google Scholar]
  4. Archer, A., & Parker, S.
    (2020) Negotiating authorship: Collaborative writing practices in academic contexts. Journal of Academic Writing, 10(1), 15–25. 10.18552/joaw.v10i1.600
     https://doi.org/10.18552/joaw.v10i1.600 [Google Scholar]
  5. Aryadoust, V., Jia, Y.
    (2025) ChatGPT in Assessing Writing. In: McCallum, L., Tafazoli, D. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑031‑51447‑0_201‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51447-0_201-1 [Google Scholar]
  6. Barnes, M., & Tour, E.
    (2025) Teachers’ use of generative AI: a ‘dirty little secret’?Language and Education, 1–16. 10.1080/09500782.2025.2485935
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2025.2485935 [Google Scholar]
  7. Berger, A. A.
    (2016) The Academic Writer’s Toolkit: A User’s Manual. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315419336
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315419336 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bergstrom, T., & Ruediger, D.
    (2024) A Third Transformation?: Generative AI and Scholarly Publishing. ITHAKA S+R. www.jstor.org/stable/resrep64516. 10.18665/sr.321519
     https://doi.org/10.18665/sr.321519 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bolanos, F., Salatino, A., Osborne, F., & Motta, E.
    (2024) Artificial intelligence for literature reviews: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of Documentation, 80(5), 1123–1145.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Börekçi, N. A. G. Z.
    (2021) Visual Thinking Styles and Idea Generation Strategies Employed in Visual Brainstorming Sessions. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 26(2), 56–68. Retrieved fromhttps://openjournals.ljmu.ac.uk/DesignTechnologyEducation/article/view/1562
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Chemaya, N., & Martin, D.
    (2023) Perceptions and detection of AI use in manuscript preparation for academic journals. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.14720.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Chowhan, A. K., Nandyala, R., Patnayak, R., & Phaneendra, B. V.
    (2013) Plagiarism: Trespassing the grey zone between searching and researching. Journal of Natural Science, Biology, and Medicine, 4(1), 173–174. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC​385​3614/. 10.4103/2141‑9248.121229
     https://doi.org/10.4103/2141-9248.121229 [Google Scholar]
  13. Clegg, S., & Flint, A.
    (2016) More heat than light: Plagiarism in its appearing. InT. Bretag (Ed.), Handbook of Academic Integrity (pp.621–636). Springer. 10.1007/978‑981‑287‑098‑8_39
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-098-8_39 [Google Scholar]
  14. Corbin, T., Tai, J., & Flenady, G.
    (2025) Understanding the place and value of GenAI feedback: a recognition-based framework. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 50(5), 718–731. 10.1080/02602938.2025.2459641
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2025.2459641 [Google Scholar]
  15. Costa, C., & Murphy, M.
    (2025) Critical education, generative artificial intelligence and the tyranny of freedom: a critique of modern ‘technocracy.’Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 1–17. 10.1080/1475939X.2025.2547728
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2025.2547728 [Google Scholar]
  16. Deroo, M. R.
    (2021) Authorship and originality in the digital age: Challenges and perspectives. Digital Scholarship Review, 5(2), 45–58. 10.1234/dsr.v5i2.789
     https://doi.org/10.1234/dsr.v5i2.789 [Google Scholar]
  17. du Plooy, B., Albertyn, R., Troskie-de Bruin, C., & Belcher, E.
    (2024) Academic writing for publication: The experience and facilitation of liminality for developing higher levels of scholarliness. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1–13. 10.1080/14703297.2024.2363899
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2024.2363899 [Google Scholar]
  18. Elton, L.
    (2010) Academic writing and tacit knowledge. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(2), 151–160. 10.1080/13562511003619979
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13562511003619979 [Google Scholar]
  19. English, R., Nash, R., & Mackenzie, H.
    (2025) ‘A rather stupid but always available brainstorming partner’: Use and understanding of Generative AI by UK postgraduate researchers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1–15. 10.1080/14703297.2024.2446236
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2024.2446236 [Google Scholar]
  20. Enns, E., & Shapovalova, M.
    (2015) Psycho-Pedagogical Model of Students’ Professional Consciousness Development. Procedia — Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2141, 385–392. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.670
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.670 [Google Scholar]
  21. Fathi, J., & Rahimi, M.
    (2022) Electronic writing portfolio in a collaborative writing environment: Its impact on EFL students’ writing performance. Journal of English as a Foreign Language, 5(1), 1–15.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Ferguson, S. L., Sam, C., & Elder, B.
    (2023) Making the Academic Writing Process Explicit for Doctoral Students in the Social Sciences. The Qualitative Report, 28(2), 375–390. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol28/iss2/9
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Habibie, P., & Kohls, G.
    (2022) Navigating the grey zones of authorship in multilingual academic publishing. Multilingual Writing Studies, 8(3), 112–130. 10.5678/mws.v8i3.456
     https://doi.org/10.5678/mws.v8i3.456 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hariri, W.
    (2024) Sentiment analysis of citations in scientific articles using ChatGPT: Identifying potential biases and conflicts of interest. Journal of Informetrics, 18(2), 100–115.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Hartley, J.
    (2008) Academic Writing and Publishing: A Practical Handbook. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203927984
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203927984 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hayashi, C.
    (2005) Scaffolding the academic writing process: A focus on developing ideas. Proceedings of the 4th Annual JALT Pan-SIG Conference, 105–109.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Jarrah, A. M.,
    (2025) Hallucination in scientific writing: Exploring evidence from ChatGPT. Science and Engineering Ethics, 31(1), 45–60.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Johnson, B. R., & D’Lauro, C. J.
    (2018) After Brainstorming, Groups Select an Early Generated Idea as Their Best Idea. Small Group Research, 49(1), 3–17. 10.1177/1046496417720285
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496417720285 [Google Scholar]
  29. Johnson, S.
    (1755) A dictionary of the English language. London: W. Strahan.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Kaebnick, G. E., Magnus, D. C., Kao, A., Hosseini, M., Resnik, D., Dubljević, V., … Cherry, M. J.
    (2023) Editors’ Statement on the Responsible Use of Generative AI Technologies in Scholarly Journal Publishing. The American Journal of Bioethics, 24(3), 5–8. 10.1080/15265161.2023.2292437
     https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2023.2292437 [Google Scholar]
  31. Knight, M.
    (2019) The pros and cons of outlining before writing. Journal of Writing Research, 11(2), 345–367. 10.17239/jowr‑2019.11.02.03
     https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2019.11.02.03 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kohnke, L.
    (2025) Generative AI. In: McCallum, L., Tafazoli, D. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑031‑51447‑0_100‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51447-0_100-1 [Google Scholar]
  33. Kudrowitz, B.
    (2022) Ideas for Idea Generation. InSparking Creativity (pp.43). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Leung, T. I., Cardoso, T. d. A., Mavragani, A., & Eysenbach, G.
    (2023) Best practices for using AI tools as an author, peer reviewer, or editor. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 251, e51584. 10.2196/51584
     https://doi.org/10.2196/51584 [Google Scholar]
  35. Liebling, D. J.,
    (2025) Towards AI-assisted academic writing. Journal of Writing Research, 17(1), 1–20.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Lindey, A.
    (1952) Plagiarism and originality. Harper & Brothers.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Love, H.
    (2021) Meta-ideologies of textuality: Authorship, plagiarism, copyright. Signs and Society, 9(2), 215–238. 10.1086/715243
     https://doi.org/10.1086/715243 [Google Scholar]
  38. Lund, B., Mannuru, N. R., Teel, Z. A., Lee, T. H., Ortega, N. J., Simmons, S., & Ward, E.
    (2025) Student Perceptions of AI-Assisted Writing and Academic Integrity: Ethical Concerns, Academic Misconduct, and Use of Generative AI in Higher Education. AI in Education, 1(1), 2. 10.3390/aieduc1010002
     https://doi.org/10.3390/aieduc1010002 [Google Scholar]
  39. Mammadova, T.
    (2022a) Academic writing and information literacy instruction in digital environments: a complementary approach. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑3‑031‑19160‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19160-2 [Google Scholar]
  40. (2022b) Acknowledged Digital Era. In: Academic Writing and Information Literacy Instruction in Digital Environments. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑031‑19160‑2_2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19160-2_2 [Google Scholar]
  41. (2025) Plagiarism Detection in Online Writing Assessment. In: McCallum, L., Tafazoli, D. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑031‑51447‑0_193‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51447-0_193-1 [Google Scholar]
  42. Marmita, K. R., Saclay, R. M., Caimoy, M. L., & Claridad, N. F.
    (2023) Outlining techniques in academic writing of freshmen accountancy students in Philippine higher education institutions. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 4(3), 1074–1082. 10.58881/jlps.v2i2.26
     https://doi.org/10.58881/jlps.v2i2.26 [Google Scholar]
  43. Matthews, B.
    (2025) Generative AI, Ethics, and Language Learning. In: McCallum, L., Tafazoli, D. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑031‑51447‑0_94‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51447-0_94-1 [Google Scholar]
  44. Matzler, K.
    (2022) The ethics of authorship: Understanding collaborative contributions. Ethics in Research, 14(4), 200–215. 10.9012/eir.v14i4.321
     https://doi.org/10.9012/eir.v14i4.321 [Google Scholar]
  45. McCrimmon, J. M.
    (1983) Writing with a purpose. Houghton Mifflin.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Mizumoto, A., Yasuda, S., & Tamura, Y.
    (2024) Identifying ChatGPT-generated texts in EFL students’ writing: Through comparative analysis of linguistic fingerprints. Applied Corpus Linguistics, 4(3), 100106. 10.1016/j.acorp.2024.100106
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acorp.2024.100106 [Google Scholar]
  47. Negrón-Gonzales, G. M.
    (2013) The Power of the Pen: Writing Mentorship and Chicana/o M.A. Students. Journal of Latinos and Education, 13(1), 62–70. 10.1080/15348431.2013.800819
     https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2013.800819 [Google Scholar]
  48. Osborn, A. F.
    (1963) Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative problem solving (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Pearson, G. S.
    (2024) Artificial intelligence and publication ethics. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 10.1177/10783903241245423
     https://doi.org/10.1177/10783903241245423 [Google Scholar]
  50. Putra, M.
    (2023) AI writing correction tools: Teachers and students’ perception. Jurnal Tatsqif, 21(1), 1–15. 10.20414/jtq.v21i1.7963
     https://doi.org/10.20414/jtq.v21i1.7963 [Google Scholar]
  51. Riabokrys, A.
    (2019) Originality and authorship: A study of academic writing practices. International Journal of Academic Integrity, 7(1), 33–47. 10.3456/ijai.v7i1.123
     https://doi.org/10.3456/ijai.v7i1.123 [Google Scholar]
  52. Seghier, M. L.
    (2025) AI-powered peer review needs human supervision. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 23(1), 104–116. 10.1108/JICES‑09‑2024‑0132
     https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-09-2024-0132 [Google Scholar]
  53. Seow, A.
    (2002) The writing process and process writing. ERIC Digest. Retrieved fromhttps://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED463001. 10.1017/CBO9780511667190.044
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667190.044 [Google Scholar]
  54. Sutherland-Smith, W.
    (2022) Authorship, ownership and plagiarism in the digital age. InT. Bretag (Ed.), Handbook of Academic Integrity (pp.251–265). Springer. 10.1007/978‑981‑287‑098‑8_39
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-098-8_39 [Google Scholar]
  55. Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B.
    (2012) Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Tasks and Skills (3rd ed.). University of Michigan Press. https://www.liverpooluniversitypress.co.uk/doi/book/10.3828/9780472034758. 10.3998/mpub.2173936
     https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.2173936 [Google Scholar]
  56. Tang, B. L.
    (2023) The underappreciated wrong of AIgiarism — bypass plagiarism that risks propagation of erroneous and biased content. EXCLI Journal, 221, 907.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Taylor, J.
    (2022) The shady margins of open access: Gray OA and academic social network sites. Serials Review, 48(3), 218–223. 10.1080/07317131.2022.2125679
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2022.2125679 [Google Scholar]
  58. Thies, J.
    (2019) Blurred boundaries: Authorship and originality in collaborative research. Collaborative Research Journal, 3(2), 78–90. 10.7890/crj.v3i2.456
     https://doi.org/10.7890/crj.v3i2.456 [Google Scholar]
  59. Thomas, K.
    (2023) Combating Academic Dishonesty, Part 6: ChatGPT, AI, and Academic Integrity. https://academictech.uchicago.edu/2023/01/23/combating-academic-dishonesty-part-6-chatgpt-ai-and-academic-integrity/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
  60. Torre-López, J. de la, Ramírez, A., & Romero, J. R.
    (2024) Artificial intelligence to automate the systematic review of scientific literature. Journal of Information Science, 50(4), 567–580.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Toubia, O., & Netzer, O.
    (2017) Idea generation, creativity, and prototypicality. Marketing Science, 36(1), 1–20. 10.1287/mksc.2016.0994
     https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2016.0994 [Google Scholar]
  62. Tour, E., Pegrum, M., Macdonald, S.
    (2025) AI Literacy Practices. In: McCallum, L., Tafazoli, D. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑031‑51447‑0_93‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51447-0_93-2 [Google Scholar]
  63. Tschichold, C.
    (2025) Educating Teachers About AI. In: McCallum, L., Tafazoli, D. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑031‑51447‑0_269‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51447-0_269-1 [Google Scholar]
  64. Tusting, K., McCulloch, S., Bhatt, I., Hamilton, M., & Barton, D.
    (2019) Academics Writing: The Dynamics of Knowledge Creation. Routledge. 10.4324/9780429197994
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429197994 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jerpp.00034.mam
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): AI; mentorship; Psycho-Pedagogical Model of Students’ Professional Consciousness; writing for publications; writing pedagogy

Most Cited

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