New study reveals bias in AI text detection tools impacts academic publishing fairness

A study published in PeerJ Computer Science reveals significant accuracy-bias trade-offs in artificial intelligence text detection tools that could disproportionately impact non-native English speakers and certain academic disciplines in scholarly publishing.

The paper, titled “The Accuracy-Bias Trade-Offs in AI Text Detection Tools and Their Impact on Fairness in Scholarly Publication,” examines how tools designed to identify AI-generated content may inadvertently create new barriers in academic publishing.

Key findings

• Popular AI detection tools (GPTZero, ZeroGPT, and DetectGPT) demonstrate inconsistent accuracy when distinguishing between human-written and AI-generated academic abstracts
• AI-assisted writing, where human text is enhanced by language models for improved readability, presents particular challenges for detection systems
• High accuracy in AI text detection tools doesn’t mean fairness. Ironically, the most accurate tool in this study showed the strongest bias against certain groups of authors and academic disciplines.
• Non-native English speakers face higher rates of false positives, with their work more frequently misclassified as entirely AI-generated.

“This study highlights the limitations of detection-focused approaches and urges a shift toward ethical, responsible, and transparent use of LLMs in scholarly publication,” noted the research team.

The research was conducted as part of ongoing efforts to understand how AI tools affect academic integrity while ensuring equitable access to publishing opportunities across diverse author backgrounds.