AI Can Assist in Writing SINTA 2 Articles, but Authors Must Still Think Critically
The essence of the restoration movement is to build civilisation and strengthen the quality of human beings.
Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) technology have begun to change the way academics compose scholarly works. Various AI platforms can now help construct sentences, improve grammar and even summarise references within seconds. However, this convenience does not mean AI may take over an author’s thinking process, especially when writing scientific articles for reputable journals such as SINTA 2.
A review published in the Journal of Korean Medical Science, available through PubMed Central, affirms that generative AI can serve as a useful aid in scientific writing. Nevertheless, the author retains full responsibility for the manuscript’s content, from data accuracy and analysis to the interpretation of results and research conclusions. AI cannot replace that role.
AI technology can be utilised for various technical tasks, such as improving sentence structure, refining grammar, translating manuscripts or helping to draft an outline. In this way, authors can save time during the editing process.
However, a scientific article is not judged on polished language alone. The quality of a publication depends on the author’s ability to formulate research problems, critique the literature, design methodology, analyse data and draw conclusions based on scientific evidence. All of these processes require critical thinking that AI does not possess.
The review also notes that various international scientific publishers share a similar view. AI must not be listed as an author because it cannot take responsibility for the content of a publication. Instead, human authors are obliged to ensure that all information has been verified and is free from the errors and biases that AI may produce.
Furthermore, the use of AI should be disclosed transparently if required by a journal’s policy. Such transparency is important for safeguarding academic integrity and building trust in research findings.
For authors aiming to publish in SINTA 2 journals, AI is best positioned as an assistant, not as a replacement for the researcher. Technology can accelerate the writing process, but the quality of an article is still determined by the author’s ability to think critically, construct logical arguments and produce original findings.
In other words, AI may help assemble sentences, but the ideas, analysis and scientific responsibility must still come from humans. This is the key foundation for ensuring that scholarly work retains high academic value and credibility.