ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove

By Chris Stokel-Walker. 2023

752 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Health Informatics, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging, AI Ethics, Fairness & Society

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Health Informatics

In Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging

In AI Ethics, Fairness & Society

Citations in the corpus

Language Generation Models Can Cause Harm: So What Can We Do About It? An Actionable Survey (2022, neutral): “and Perlman, 2022), science (Stokel-Walker, 2023), and more.”
A Brief Overview of ChatGPT: The History, Status Quo and Potential Future Development (2023, background): “However, the strong creativity of ChatGPT is a double-edged sword, especially in the filed of education and science [31], [32].”
ChatGPT in Healthcare: A Taxonomy and Systematic Review (2023, background): “…written in languages other than English (e.g., French [84]), without full text access (e.g., [62]), or whose main content has little to do with (or is not specific to) either ChatGPT (e.g., [46, 104, 33, 37]) or healthcare (e.g., [97, 103, 27, 6, 39, 13, 88, 21, 66, 115, 102, 43]) are excluded.”
Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education: Scoping Review (2023, background): “Instances of technological plagiarism already exist, in which AI has generated abstracts or entire scientific papers with minimal human involvement [66,67].”
Opportunities and Challenges for ChatGPT and Large Language Models in Biomedicine and Health (2023, background): “However, after several ethical concerns were raised [127], several of these papers ended up removing ChatGPT from the author list [128, 129].”
Artificial Hallucinations in ChatGPT: Implications in Scientific Writing (2023, methodology): “While some see it as a valuable tool for streamlining the writing process, others view it as a threat to the integrity of authorship [4].”
Welcome to the Era of ChatGPT et al. (2023, background): “Some academic papers listed ChatGPT as a co-author (Stokel-Walker 2023), in most cases probably intended more as a marketing stunt than anything else.”
ChatGPT and large language models in academia: opportunities and challenges (2023, background): “Indeed, we have already seen manuscripts where ChatGPT has been listed as author [6–8].”
"Kelly is a Warm Person, Joseph is a Role Model": Gender Biases in LLM-Generated Reference Letters (2023, background): “The emergence of LLMs has facilitated the generation of coherent long texts, enabling various use cases of document generation (Sallam, 2023; Transformer et al., 2022; Stokel-Walker, 2023; HalloCarrasco et al., 2023).”
The ethics of ChatGPT - Exploring the ethical issues of an emerging technology (2024, background): “Some scientists have attempted to pre-empt this issue by adding ChatGPT as an author to publications, but the practice does not seem to find acceptance in the academic community (Stokel-Walker, 2023).”
ChatGPT in medicine: an overview of its applications, advantages, limitations, future prospects, and ethical considerations (2023, background): “ChatGPT, according to publishers and preprint servers contacted by Nature’s news team, does not meet the criteria for a study author since it cannot bear responsibility for the content and authenticity of scientiﬁc studies (Stokel-Walker, 2023).”
From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing (2023, positive): “Researchers are also encouraged to document their use of LLMs in the methods or acknowledgements sections of their papers [17].”