Marketplace All-in-One AI-generated "letters to the editor" are flooding academic publications
Nov 24, 2025
Dr. Carlos Chaccour, a physician-scientist at the University of Navarra, delves into the rise of AI-generated letters to the editor, sparked by an oddly flawed critique he received. He reveals how the publish-or-perish culture incentivizes academics to flood journals with these letters, boosting their perceived clout despite little scholarly value. Chaccour discusses the dangers of low-quality publications creating a science bubble that risks eroding public trust and reputation for institutions. The conversation highlights the dark side of academic publishing in the age of AI.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Suspicious Letter Sparked an Investigation
- Dr. Carlos Chaccour found a suspicious New England Journal of Medicine letter that misattributed critiques to his own work.
- He and Matthew Rudd then analyzed letters and spotted a surge of new prolific letter-writers after ChatGPT's release.
Perverse Incentives Inflate Publication Counts
- Academic incentives like publish-or-perish drive researchers to seek easy publication shortcuts.
- Journals and institutions also benefit from inflated publication counts, creating perverse incentives across the system.
Letters Are Easy Yet Misleading Currency
- Letters to the editor are short, focused, and easy to produce, making them vulnerable to mass generation.
- Many readers see a familiar name and assume weighty scholarship, so prolific letters can falsely boost clout.