An interdisciplinary journal, Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, is taking "corrective actions" following an investigation revealing that ChatGPT was used to update references in a published paper. Krithika Srinivasan, the journal's editor and a geographer at the University of Edinburgh, confirmed to Retraction Watch that recommendations have been submitted to the journal’s publisher, Sage, who will proceed according to their policy.
The investigation found that while no references in the paper were fabricated, errors were introduced when one author, unbeknownst to the submitting author, used ChatGPT instead of traditional referencing software to generate the citations and reference list. The original manuscript contained correct references, but the errors emerged during the ChatGPT intervention.
The issue came to light on April 1, when Bret Collier, a wildlife ecologist at Louisiana State University, alerted Srinivasan and others to multiple non-existent citations in the March 2024 study titled “Breeding Distrust: The Biopolitics of Chronic Wasting Disease in White-Tailed Deer.” Collier pointed out that some citations were entirely false, including one purportedly from a 2026 publication.
Collier’s email highlighted the impact of incorrect or fabricated citations on scientific integrity and journal metrics, emphasizing the importance of accurate references for foundational logic and quality scientific content.
Matthew Fry, the corresponding author and a geographer at the University of Utah, responded promptly, noting he had already reported the issue to the journal on March 25 and provided the correct references. Fry disclosed that the lead author, Zach Tabor, a former master’s student at the University of North Texas, had used ChatGPT to update the references before submission, without the co-authors' knowledge.
Fry assured that the references in Tabor’s thesis, which the manuscript was based on, are correct and accurate. The journal is now finalizing its corrective measures to address the issue.
Impact on Scientific Integrity
Collier's concern underscores the broader implications of such errors, including the potential questioning of scientific integrity globally and the effect on journal rating metrics. The journal’s proactive approach in investigating and addressing the issue is a critical step in maintaining the trust and reliability of scientific publications.
Conclusion
This incident serves as a reminder of the importance of rigorous verification processes in academic publishing, especially with the growing use of AI tools. Ensuring the accuracy of references is crucial for the credibility and integrity of scientific research. The journal’s corrective actions will help uphold these standards and mitigate the impact of the errors.
