Before deciding to use genAI tools in your research, check with your research supervisor (HDR students) or your School's Research Lead (staff) to make sure that it’s permissible, and that your intended use won’t breach the University’s and external research codes and policies. You may also need to consider any risks to research integrity using AI tools may introduce.
For more information from the University of Newcastle, see Generative AI in Research - Guidance for Researchers (PDF, requires staff login to access).
Just because information is available on the Internet does not mean that it’s free from copyright, or that it has been shared with the owner’s consent. It’s also almost impossible to know where the information came from and it could contain inherent biases, which may then be incorporated into a genAI tool’s response to your prompts. GenAI can also generate false information called 'hallucinations'. This occurs when AI either provides false information or creates what it thinks is real information but is in fact not.
For these reasons, it’s important to check the outputs from genAI to ensure you aren’t breaching copyright, consent, or research integrity – and to ensure that your research output is not flawed by bias or inaccuracy. For more information, see Issues and Considerations.
The University's Responsible Conduct of Research Policy includes some guidance for researchers around the use of AI in research.
The Research Ethics & Integrity unit have also released the Generative AI in Research Guideline via the Policy Library.
HDR students and their supervisors should read the guidance for Generative Artificial Intelligence and Higher Degrees by Research (PDF).
More broadly for the university sector, TEQSA released Gen AI strategies for research training: Emerging practice in June 2025.
As a researcher you must ensure that any use of generative AI tools does not breach the relevant funder’s policies. Check the policies on the use of generative AI in research funded by the:
If you are permitted to use generative AI tools for any part of your research, you must acknowledge this openly in your research documentation. Use the following links to check different publishers’ statements on the use of generative AI tools to produce content for publication:
If you are permitted to use a generative AI tool for any part of your research, keep these considerations in mind:
Read the response with a critical eye. Does it agree with what you’ve already learned about your research topic? How does it compare with other authoritative research? Does it contain any kind of bias, or unexpected information?
Besides complying with the various codes and guidelines mentioned elsewhere, consider what will happen to any data you input into generative AI. DO NOT input any data which may breach privacy legislation.
There may also be issues around copyright and ownership relating to some uses of AI tools - see our Issues and considerations page for more information.
Has the AI tool been designed for public use? Is it designed to generate complex data sets for research, or for analysis? Can you find any reviews of its performance, usefulness or relevance?
This post from the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) contains strategies which authors can use to preserve their anonymity for the peer review process, including:
Where publishers allow use of generative AI tools with research publications, disclosure of your use may be a requirement for transparency (see Publisher statements on using AI for more).
As this recent example from the journal Surfaces and Interfaces shows, issues can creep in when care isn't taken - in this case, part of the conversation with the AI tool was included in the final product:
Screen-capped 18/03/2024, our highlight
The publisher's policy in this space is clear - AI tools "should only be used to improve readability and language of the work", disclosure of use is required, and "all work should be reviewed and edited carefully".
As Technology Networks - Informatics reports, the authors of this article failed to include a disclosure statement in their manuscript and the publisher has posted a response on social media stating that they are investigating the paper.
Scholarly Kitchen has posted an update, including the results of searching for other articles with similar issues.
Some journals have already retracted articles that were found to not meet their editorial and scientific standards.
This situation certainly highlights the importance of proof-reading all outputs from generative AI that you wish to use in publications.
If you are not provided guidance on how to disclose your use of genAI, a sample statement is provided on the Cite page. This page is targeted towards students, but the general principles are valid for staff as well.
For more information:
While all genAI tools can provide 'information', some can also function as a search engine/tool:
Some tools provide sources directly, while others can provide summaries to asked questions with linked sources, or lists of sources. Because of their internet connectivity and search capability, these tools are less likely to 'hallucinate' sources. With that said, it's still important to consider which of the sources provided will be suitable for your needs, as you may also be presented with general web material and grey literature in addition to articles, chapters and papers (depending on the tool used). Some recent research has suggested that the results from some tools may not be great for accuracy or understanding.
Using AI in academic research means strongly committing to transparency and accountability to keep your scholarly work legitimate (and eventually, as funded researchers, to comply with grant and publishers’ requirements). So, while generative AI can be a game-changer, it’s crucial to use it wisely and follow ethical guidelines to ensure your research is reliable and credible.
The University of Sydney has a number of useful pages in their AI module if you'd like to learn more:
It's important to check each citation that is provided in outputs from genAI tools, due to the potential 'hallucination' problem. If you have citations taken from answers generated by genAI tools and can't find them, try searching directly for the journal titles cited to source the articles - it's possible they don't exist.
Still can't locate something that seems important, or just stuck? You can book in to speak with one of our librarians for help - there are online and in-person options for both students and researchers.
'Connector' AI function by the use of functionality known as 'citation chaining' to find cited, similar, or related articles. This is most helpful when you have found an article that is highly relevant to your needs, and you're searching for connected publications. These AI tools usually work via entering the details of an article, and can often provide visual maps that allow you to engage with other publications via their connect to the article you entered the details for.
Examples include:
While there are many options to enter the details of an article to start the search for connections, best practice is to enter the title or DOI of an article. This relies on materials that are openly available on the web and removes the need to upload files. Wherever possible, uploading files to AI tools should be avoided due to copyright considerations.
We'd love to hear your feedback on this portal. If you think changes could be made, or more information added, please visit our feedback page.
