Academic journals' AI policies fail to curb the surge in AI-assisted academic writing
This highlights a transparency gap in AI-assisted academic writing, affecting journals, publishers, and the scientific community, and is incremental in showing policy ineffectiveness.
The study analyzed over 5.2 million papers and found that despite 70% of journals adopting AI policies, researchers' use of AI writing tools has increased dramatically with no significant difference between journals with or without policies, and only 0.1% of papers explicitly disclosed AI use.
The rapid integration of generative AI into academic writing has prompted widespread policy responses from journals and publishers. However, the effectiveness of these policies remains unclear. Here, we analyze 5,114 journals and over 5.2 million papers to evaluate the real-world impact of AI usage guidelines. We show that despite 70% of journals adopting AI policies (primarily requiring disclosure), researchers' use of AI writing tools has increased dramatically across disciplines, with no significant difference between journals with or without policies. Non-English-speaking countries, physical sciences, and high-OA journals exhibit the highest growth rates. Crucially, full-text analysis on 164k scientific publications reveals a striking transparency gap: Of the 75k papers published since 2023, only 76 (0.1%) explicitly disclosed AI use. Our findings suggest that current policies have largely failed to promote transparency or restrain AI adoption. We urge a re-evaluation of ethical frameworks to foster responsible AI integration in science.