The use of synthetic intelligence equipment (AI) for processes such as manuscripts, writing applications for pairs and exams will be widely accepted in the next two years, suggests an investigation with some 5,000 researchers in more than 70 countries through the publishing house Wiley
The survey asked the studies how they used generative teams, which come with chatbots such as Chatgpt and Deepseek, as well as what they think of possible technology programs. The effects recommend that the majority of the studies look at them become fundamental for clinical studies and publication (see “acceptable use”). More than part of the respondents, they think that AI exceeds humans in more than 20 of the responsibilities given as an example of instances of use, in specific through the examination of giant sets of articles, summarizing the effects of studies , through the detection of errors in writing, verifying plagiarism and organizing appointments. More than part of the survey participants they expect the AI existing in 34 of the 43 cases of use in the next two years.
Source: Explanation report, Wiley
“What stands out is the imminence of this,” said Sebastian Porsdam Mann of the University of Copenhagen, who studies the practices and ethics of the use of generative the research. “The people who occupy positions that will be affected through this, who are all, but for various titles, will have to start” to solve this challenge now, “he adds.
Wiley, based in Hoboken, New Jersey, launched the effects of the online survey on February 4. Josh Jarrett, senior vice president and general manager of the editor’s expansion team, says he hopes they will serve as a road map for innovators and begin -step for opportunities to expand the tools of AI. “There is a wide acceptance that AI will restructure the research box. “
The survey questioned 4,946 researchers worldwide, 27% of whom are researchers at the beginning of their career. Perhaps surprising, says Jarrett, the effects show that “people do not use these teams in their daily work. ” Only 45% of the first wave of respondents (1,043 researchers) said that, in fact, they had used AI to help their research, and the utmost ungrateful uses that have cited were the translation, reread and the amendment of manuscripts ( See “Uses of AI”).
Although 81% of those 1,043 respondents said they used Chatpt OpenAi for non-public or professional purposes, only one third had heard of other generative-ai-AI teams, such as Gemini de Google and Microsoft Co-Pilotarry, however, there are differences Transparent between countries and disciplines, with researchers in China and Germany, as well as PC scientists, are the maximum that AI probably uses in their work.
Source: ExplanAItions report, Wiley
The majority of survey participants expressed interest in expanding their use of AI. 72% need to use AI to get manuscripts ready in the next two years, for responsibilities such as detecting writing errors, plagiarism checks, and organizing citations. % that AI already surpasses humans in those responsibilities (see “What Does It Do Better: Humans or AI?”).
Around 67% of respondents also expressed interest in using AI to handle large amounts of information, for example helping to review the literature, summarizing papers and processing data. Early-career researchers showed greater interest than did more senior colleagues in using AI for writing grant applications and finding potential collaborators. “These are both things that come easier with experience and seniority,” says Porsdam Mann. “Using AI will help even those things out a little bit.”
However, researchers are less convinced of AI’s roles in more complex responsibilities, such as identifying gaps in the literature, opting for a journal to submit manuscripts, recommending peer-reviewed or suggesting applicable citations. Despite the fact that 64% of respondents are open to employing AI for those responsibilities in the next two years, the majority say that humans still outperform AI in those areas.
Researchers think AI can already perform some tasks better than people.
Case of use
Examples
Q: Who is improving lately: or AI?
Manuscript preparation
Detecting errors/bias in own writing
Involuntary Homicide Management
Writing (e. g. , copying, translation)
Format
Populated quotes
AI (62% of respondents)
Handling information
Reviewing a large number of studies
AI agent to monitor key new publications
Automated processing of unstructured knowledge (e. g. , cataloguing occasions in video hours)
Data visualization
Ai (60%)
Share results
Summary of Effects of Article Effects
Knowledge-management agent to help make information accessible
AI (58%)
Growing impact
Generate educational content in an article
Multimedia generation
Video abstract or “explainer” generator
Humans (51%)
Improvement of study strategies and collaboration
Documentation writing
Optimization of experimental design
Identifying potential collaborators
Tools to optimize allocation of shared resources
Advanced simulations
Humans (58%)
Review through your classmates
Peer review advisory tool on article comparisons
Adapt that of examiners in standardized format
Automated feedback to reviewers
Humans (59%)
Source: Explanation Report, Wiley
Doi: https://doi. org/10. 1038/d41586-025-00343-5
News 30 JAN 25
Editorial 29 JAN 25
News 29 JAN 25
Nature Index 05 Feb 25
News February 04 25
News January 31 25
Nature index February 5 25
World View 04 FEB 25
Race Feature February 4 25