Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share How Gen AI is disrupting academic publishing. With Samantha Curle
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
How Gen AI is disrupting academic publishing. With Samantha Curle
Today I’m talking to Samantha Curle from the University of Bath about her recent article, Generative AI and the future of writing for publication: insights from applied linguistics journal editors.
The peer review process is under increasing strain. With the explosion of submissions to academic journals since ChatGPT became available to all, editorial boards are struggling to keep pace. Peer reviewers are in short supply, and this has prompted (pardon the pun) an increased use of AI in the review process itself, leading to concerns that some articles may be making it to print without having been subjected to the appropriate level of scrutiny.
Samantha and I dig into the data from her study of journal editors and discuss the cracks that are appearing in the system. We also talk about pressure to publish, questionable research practices, the replication crisis, opaque data sets, the future of publishing and more. Samantha also offers advice to teacher researchers looking to publish, and her plans for future projects.
Guest bio
Samantha Curle is a Reader in Applied Linguistics at the University of Bath & Adjunct Professor at Khazar University, Azerbaijan. She is Co-founder of the Cambridge ReachSci Mini-PhD on Multilingual Education & a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy & the Royal Society of Arts. She read for her DPhil in Education (Applied Linguistics) at the University of Oxford, having previously read for two MSc degrees there. Her research focuses on English Medium Instruction (EMI) in higher education, examining factors that influence academic achievement, such as English proficiency & psychological constructs. Her research spans across four continents (Africa, Asia, Europe, South America) and she has published in journals such as Language Teaching & Journal of Engineering Education.
References
Moorhouse, B., Consoli, S. and Curle, S. (2025). Generative AI and the future of writing for publication: insights from applied linguistics journal editors. Applied Linguistics Review. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2025-0021
Samantha’s Research Gate profile https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Samantha-Curle
Follow Samantha on Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/samanthacurle/
Further reading
Hinz, A. (2025). Navigating Generative AI in Academic Publishing: An Interview With Benjamin Luke Moorhouse. De Gruyter Conversations. Available at: https://blog.degruyter.com/navigating-generative-ai-in-academic-publishing-an-interview-with-benjamin-luke-moorhouse/
Gibney, E. (2025) Scientists hide messages in papers to game AI peer review. Nature. Available at:doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-025-02172-y
Kurzgesagt - In a nutshell. (2025). AI Slop is destroying the internet. [Video]. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zfN9wnPvU0 [Accessed 16th October 2025].
Simons, J. (2024) Harvard’s Gino Report Reveals How A Dataset Was Altered. Data Colada. Available at: https://datacolada.org/118 [Accessed 11th August 2025]
Timecodes
00:00 Introduction
01:49 Samantha Curle
06:22 The spike in submissions
11:05 Why the peer review process was already struggling
13:09 AI generated reviews
15:50 The importance of rigorous peer review
24:31 Rethinking the process
29:03 Questionable research practices
34:05 What has changed in the wake of the replication crisis?
35:34 The difficulty of accessing data sets
40:35 Who can instigate change?
44:07 Advice for teachers looking to publish
48:39 Samantha’s future projects
View all episodes
By Phil MartinToday I’m talking to Samantha Curle from the University of Bath about her recent article, Generative AI and the future of writing for publication: insights from applied linguistics journal editors.
The peer review process is under increasing strain. With the explosion of submissions to academic journals since ChatGPT became available to all, editorial boards are struggling to keep pace. Peer reviewers are in short supply, and this has prompted (pardon the pun) an increased use of AI in the review process itself, leading to concerns that some articles may be making it to print without having been subjected to the appropriate level of scrutiny.
Samantha and I dig into the data from her study of journal editors and discuss the cracks that are appearing in the system. We also talk about pressure to publish, questionable research practices, the replication crisis, opaque data sets, the future of publishing and more. Samantha also offers advice to teacher researchers looking to publish, and her plans for future projects.
Guest bio
Samantha Curle is a Reader in Applied Linguistics at the University of Bath & Adjunct Professor at Khazar University, Azerbaijan. She is Co-founder of the Cambridge ReachSci Mini-PhD on Multilingual Education & a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy & the Royal Society of Arts. She read for her DPhil in Education (Applied Linguistics) at the University of Oxford, having previously read for two MSc degrees there. Her research focuses on English Medium Instruction (EMI) in higher education, examining factors that influence academic achievement, such as English proficiency & psychological constructs. Her research spans across four continents (Africa, Asia, Europe, South America) and she has published in journals such as Language Teaching & Journal of Engineering Education.
References
Moorhouse, B., Consoli, S. and Curle, S. (2025). Generative AI and the future of writing for publication: insights from applied linguistics journal editors. Applied Linguistics Review. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2025-0021
Samantha’s Research Gate profile https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Samantha-Curle
Follow Samantha on Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/samanthacurle/
Further reading
Hinz, A. (2025). Navigating Generative AI in Academic Publishing: An Interview With Benjamin Luke Moorhouse. De Gruyter Conversations. Available at: https://blog.degruyter.com/navigating-generative-ai-in-academic-publishing-an-interview-with-benjamin-luke-moorhouse/
Gibney, E. (2025) Scientists hide messages in papers to game AI peer review. Nature. Available at:doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-025-02172-y
Kurzgesagt - In a nutshell. (2025). AI Slop is destroying the internet. [Video]. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zfN9wnPvU0 [Accessed 16th October 2025].
Simons, J. (2024) Harvard’s Gino Report Reveals How A Dataset Was Altered. Data Colada. Available at: https://datacolada.org/118 [Accessed 11th August 2025]
Timecodes
00:00 Introduction
01:49 Samantha Curle
06:22 The spike in submissions
11:05 Why the peer review process was already struggling
13:09 AI generated reviews
15:50 The importance of rigorous peer review
24:31 Rethinking the process
29:03 Questionable research practices
34:05 What has changed in the wake of the replication crisis?
35:34 The difficulty of accessing data sets
40:35 Who can instigate change?
44:07 Advice for teachers looking to publish
48:39 Samantha’s future projects