Who Owns the Argument? A Practical Test for Author Responsibility in <scp>AI</scp> ‐Assisted Scholarly Writing

2026/05/08 by Malcolm Koo, Ming‐Chi Lu
Medicine · Social Sciences · #Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education #Computational and Text Analysis Methods #Ethics and Social Impacts of AI

paper · doi:10.1002/leap.2066

openalex publication_date 2026/05/08 · openalex created_date 2026/05/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/22

Abstract

Summary Disclosure reveals whether AI tools were used, but does not clarify who retains responsibility for the argument. The main governance concern in AI‐assisted writing is not tool use itself but the delegation of reasoning. The proposed RPT test (Reasoning–Process–Traceability) asks whether authors can defend the reasoning behind claims, clarify how AI entered the writing process, and trace substantive claims to identifiable sources. Publishers and journals may benefit from guidance that distinguishes wording assistance from argument‐level substitution.

Citations

• Disclosing artificial intelligence use in scientific research and publication: When should disclosure be mandatory, optional, or unnecessary?
• Can ChatGPT be an author? A study of artificial intelligence authorship policies in top academic journals
• ChatGPT outperforms crowd workers for text-annotation tasks

Related

• Disclosing generative AI use for writing assistance should be voluntary
• The Journal of Prompt-Engineered Philosophy Or: How I Started to Track AI Assistance and Stopped Worrying About Slop
• Responsibility is not required for authorship
• Accepted with Minor Revisions: Value of AI-Assisted Scientific Writing
• The artificial intelligence disclosure penalty: Humans persistently devalue AI-generated creative writing.