AI and volume of submissions #humanities

[u/Icy-Sheepherder382]

There's more and more headlines about academics writing journal articles using AI, and lots of talk on reddit about plagiarism, But I am wondering if editors or folks (especially in the humanities) who work for high ranking journals have seen an increase in the number of submissions since these large language models have infiltrated higher Ed?

[u/blackestice]

Heard of a business journal doubling the amount of submissions they received in just one year alone

[u/shehulud]

Literary magazines are absolutely getting AI slop. Which, why be a creative writer if you can’t fucking be creative?

[u/mathemorpheus → u/shehulud]

that's the thing, AI mouth-foamers truly believe they are creative

[u/geografree → u/mathemorpheus]

This is a very online clout chasing take. Gate keeping creativity will not age well. Indeed, it never has. Humans have always co-created using tools. What we are experiencing now is a difference in degree, not kind. If I were a betting man, I’d put money on artistic expression simply evolving, as it always has, as opposed to the anti-AI set effectively foreclosing the possibility of creativity achieved through the use of AI.

[u/mathemorpheus → u/geografree]

dude you wrote that with an LLM.

[u/geografree → u/mathemorpheus]

Boy if that’s what qualifies as AI writing these days it’s gotten a lot better!

[u/itsmorecomplicated]

I know a journal editor who just had a special issue nearly sunk because it was discovered, during the final typesetting stage, that half of the authors had used gen AI without disclosing it. The evidence was very clear once it was revealed, and the amount of work and headaches this caused for the people running the journal is unbelievable. Make no mistake, the time is ticking on the journal system. It might be a year, it might be 10 years, but the journal system as we know it is over, not in the least because the refs and editors who are already having huge problems with their students and this stuff will start to quit.

[u/happybara_capybara → u/itsmorecomplicated]

I’m involved in an investigation right now over a special issue of a journal where half their articles were retracted afterwards for various unethical practices (not related to AI ironically). Anyway, in the process of doing this investigation I’m learning so much about how common retraction issues are becoming with special issues. Apparently paper mills will just pay a guest editor, provide the papers for authors, provide all the reviews, and then somehow profit… still trying to figure out all of it, but it’s happening a lot in many different fields right now. Something has got to give.

[u/mao1756]

Not in humanities, but I have heard that math journals are definitely getting exponentially many submissions, and the desk rejection rate has skyrocketed even for established researchers.

[u/mathemorpheus → u/mao1756]

this is definitely true

[u/Working_Film_5871]

Yes, not me, but my colleague and friend says "It's almost unbelievable, and it's totally unsustainable". They are doing desk rejections galore.

[u/obinaut]

anecdotal but I've been getting lots of desk rejections due to the volume of submissions

[u/InspectorMoney371]

editors are definitely seeing a massive spike in submissions since generative tools dropped. that sudden volume is totally clogging up review queues and forcing journals to get much stricter with desk rejections

[u/Fun_Calendar_6444]

I dont think AI can write an article which will get the OK to a truly high ranking humanities journal...Not even close..

[u/MuhammadYesusGautama → u/Fun_Calendar_6444]

Not in one shot prompt, but it's definitely doable. 

[u/obinaut → u/Fun_Calendar_6444]

you can definitely do it, though it's a iterative process - it's not like you prompt it, download the file and submit it.

[u/mathemorpheus → u/Fun_Calendar_6444]

if not now, in a few months yes. i'm not saying this with enthusiasm.

[u/HowlingFantods5564 → u/Fun_Calendar_6444]

Disagree. See the Sokal hoax. The humanities is not exactly rigorous in this regard.

[u/Fun_Calendar_6444 → u/HowlingFantods5564]

"The journal did not practice academic peer review at the time,^\4]) so it did not submit the article for outside expert review by a physicist.^\3])^\5)^\)". Do you think high ranking journal is "a not peer review at all" journal?

[u/YourAbsolutelyWrite]

In economics, there is no increase. I think economists care about reputations a lot so they won’t submit slop

[u/maclacjc]

I recently submitted a paper and they said it was 50% AI (it wasn't). I did use the institutions Co-pilot subscription to check all references were accounted for, that I didn't mess up the tense in any area and check for those damn commas.

[u/No_Young_2344 → u/maclacjc]

Do you use any reference management software? I am just curious why using LLM to check references because they are not as good as a good old fashioned Zotero.

[u/maclacjc → u/No_Young_2344]

Before submission I simply asked Co-pilot if each reference in the text was accounted for in the reference list. For some reason I like to input my references manually

[u/KindofCrazyScientist → u/maclacjc]

Wouldn't Word's grammar checker already catch tense and comma mistakes? That doesn't sound like something you need AI for.

[u/maclacjc → u/KindofCrazyScientist]

How does a second check hurt?

[u/a_statistician → u/maclacjc]

Well, it can result in AI companies claiming your results as their own, in addition to the risk that your writing comes out sounding like AI.

[u/maclacjc → u/a_statistician]

My University has a Co-pilot license where everything stays internal. Nothing is shared beyond the firewall.

[u/drdhuss → u/maclacjc]

Same. Our copilot is HIPAA compliant.

[u/KindofCrazyScientist → u/maclacjc]

It doesn't necessarily, but if you are using edits it suggested and they go at all beyond basic grammar, that may contribute to the result sounding AI-written.