The Great AI Witch Hunt: Reviewers Perception and (Mis)Conception of Generative AI in Research Writing

Since the release of ChatGPT in November 2022 [61], GenAI has become increasingly popular in assisting people with written, auditory, and visual tasks [45, 58, 78]. In research, GenAI offers a new approach to manuscript writing, as it can handle tasks ranging from text improvement suggestions to speech-to-text translation and even crafting initial drafts [45, 52]. Its ability to understand context and generate human-like and grammatically accurate responses fosters innovative brainstorming and enhances the quality and readability of research publications [5]. However, along with GenAI's potential to augment research activities, concerns about transparency, academic integrity, and the urgency of maintaining the credibility of research work have emerged [21, 54, 73, 78]. Despite the growing interest in using GenAI for manuscript writing and research activities [45, 64], many researchers hesitate to acknowledge its use in their papers. This is illustrated by several instances where research publications with undisclosed GenAI use were identified by readers (e.g., [53, 71, 72, 79]). Studies have identified the phenomenon of AI aversion, where AI-generated content, even if factual, is often perceived as inaccurate and misleading [12, 56] and disclosing its use can negatively impact readers' satisfaction and perception of the authors' qualifications and effort [69]. Therefore, researchers' hesitancy is partly due to their fear that acknowledging GenAI use might damage