Peer Reviewing a Probably AI-Generated Manuscript
JFC I think the article I'm peer reviewing an AI-generated article (social sciences).
The topic is super buzz-worthy and would probably get A LOT of citations/media attention (algorithmic decision-making in a super high-stakes public institution).
The literature review has early-PhD student vibes. It's a laundary list of citations without any synthesis, interpretation, or voice ("X found Y. Z argues A. B shows C"). There are also some weird phrases at the beginning of paragraphs that seem like leftover ChatGPT headings.
But then the analysis is suddenly sophisticated as fuck (quasi-experimental, machine learning, multilevel regressions). But there are literally no standard multivariate results tables... No full regression tables... No standard errors/confidence intervals, etc. Just a bunch of effect sizes and p-values reported in the write-up of the results. "Trust me bro" vibes.
The biggest red flag is that one of the figures is complete gibberish. The x-axis is labeled in a impossible sequence of years (e.g., 2010, 2012, 2013, 2010, 2014, 2015, 2016). It is full of labels that are misspelled, fuzzy, and have distorted letters (Cyrillic, Latin?).
What the fuck?