Generative artificial intelligence: Unlocking academic writing based on ethics
Keywords:
generative Artificial Intelligence, academic writing, based on ethicsAbstract
Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) has gained significant traction across diverse professional domains, particularly in academic writing. However, its application requires ethical discernment, as Gen AI may synthesize content out of context or combine incongruent elements, resulting in inaccurate output and fabricated references. This phenomenon, known as “AI hallucination”, can produce seemingly plausible yet factually incorrect or irrelevant information. This academic article aims to provide foundational understanding of Gen AI and examine how popular Gen AI tools-especially chatbot-based platforms—can be leveraged to enhance academic writing. It explores how GenAI may support the writing process across four stages: planning, drafting, revising, and referencing, guided by the conceptual framework known as the “Writing Rope”. The Writing Rope framework conceptualizes writing as an integration of five interwoven skills: 1. critical thinking, 2. syntax and sentence structure, 3. text structure, 4. writing craft, and 5. transcription skills. Each strand represents
a distinct competency that Gen AI can potentially support-provided its use remains within ethically grounded academic boundaries. This framework will be useful in understanding the great potential that comes with the significant responsibility associated with the use of GenAI in academic contexts.
References
ธนารักษ์ สารเถื่อนแก้ว. (2567). การใช้เทคโนโลยีปัญญาประดิษฐ์ AI (Chat GPT) เพื่อส่งเสริมทักษะการเขียน. Journal of Applied Education, 2(2), 45–58. https://so16.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/JAE/article/view/213.
อภิพจน์ เพียศักดิ์. (2567). หลักการใช้ AI อย่างมีจริยธรรมในงานวิจัยและการสร้างเนื้อหาทางวิชาการ. สืบค้น 19 กรกฎาคม 2568 จาก https://data-espresso.com/หลักการใช้-ai-อย่างมีจริยธรรมในงานวิจัยและการสร้างเนื้อหาทางวิชาการ/.
Ajuzieogu, U. (2024). Towards hallucination-resilient AI: Navigating challenges, ethical dilemmas, and mitigation strategies. Master’s thesis. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.26596.80000.
Bittle, M., & El-Gayar, O. (2025). Generative AI and academic integrity in higher education: A systematic review. Information, 16(4), Article 296. https://www.mdpi.com/2078-2489/16/4/296.
Cano, Y., Venuti, F., & Martinez, R. (2023). ChatGPT and AI text generators: Should academia adapt or resist? Harvard Business Publishing - Education. https://hbsp.harvard.edu/inspiring-minds/chatgpt-and-ai-text-generators-should-academia-adapt-or-resist.
Calvino, F., Reijerink, J., & Samek, L. (2025). The effects of generative AI on productivity, innovation and entrepreneurship (OECD Artificial Intelligence Papers No. 39). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/b21df222-en.
Chubb, J., Cowling, P., & Reed, D. (2022). Speeding up to keep up: Exploring the use of AI in the research process. AI & Society, 37, 1439–1457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01259-0.
Gadiko, A. (2024). Understanding and addressing AI hallucinations in healthcare and life sciences. International Journal of Health Sciences, 7(3), 1–11. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7279/86583dacea8d2d7ff5b3b0637afcb2cb34c3.pdf.
George, E. (2022, October 26). AI in research and the changing scholarly publishing landscape. Researcher.Life. Retrieved July 21, 2025, from https://researcher.life/blog/article/ai-in-research-and-the-changing-global-scholarly-publishing-landscape/.
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Santangelo, T. (2015). Research-based writing practices and the Common Core: Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. The Elementary School Journal, 115(4), 498-522.
Hayes, J. R. (2004). What triggers revision? In L. Allal, L. Chanquoy, & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes (Vol. 13, pp. 9–20). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hirata, M. C. & Azeez, H. A. (2024). Unlocking the Power of AI for Academic Writing: A Practical Guide. The Language Teacher, 48(6), JALT Conference. Retrieved July 21, 2025, from https://jalt-publications.org/articles/29452-unlocking-power-ai-academic-writing-practical-guide.
Ilieva, G., Yankova, T., & Klisarova-Belcheva, S. (2024). Effects of Generative AI in Tourism Industry. Information, 15(11), 671. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15110671.
Prillaman, M. (2024). Is ChatGPT making scientists hyper-productive? The highs and lows of using AI. Nature, 627(8002), 16–17. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-00592-w.
Pakdee, S., & Phetmalhkul, T. (2024). Guidelines for Application Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education under the Secondary Educational Service Area Office Bangkok 2. Interdisciplinary Academic and Research Journal, 4(6), 555–572. https://doi.org/10.60027/iarj.2024.278760.
Resnik, D. B., & Hosseini, M. (2025). The ethics of using artificial intelligence in scientific research: New guidance needed for a new tool. AI and Ethics, 5, 1499–1521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00493-8.
Sedita, J. (2023). The writing rope: A framework for explicit writing instruction in all subjects. Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
Sedita, J. (2025). Writing in the age of AI. Keys to Literacy. Retrieved July 19, 2025, from https://keystoliteracy.com/blog/writing-instruction-in-the-age-of-ai/.
The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. (2025). Generative AI in Academic Writing. Retrieved July 19, 2025, from https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/generative-ai-in-academic-writing/.
Tseng, W., & Warschauer, M. (2023). AI-writing tools in education: If you can’t beat them, join them. Journal of China Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 3(2), 258–262. https://doi.org/10.1515/jccall-2023-0008.
Williamson, K., & Prybutok, V. (2024). The era of artificial intelligence deception. Information, 15(6), Article 299. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15060299.
