From Adoption to Accountability in Generative AI Use: A Risk-Based Framework
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54536/ajmri.v5i5.8415Keywords:
Gen-AI Risk-Based Framework, Generative Artificial Intelligence, Professional Ethics, Responsible AI UseAbstract
This study analyses the challenges and benefits of the increasing use of generative artificial intelligence (Gen-AI) models into academic, professional, and industrial writing practices. The rapid adoption of Gen-AI in academic, professional and industrial writing has significantly enhanced efficiency in ideation, translation, summarization, drafting, and editing, reducing both time and cost. But the adoption has outpaced the development of consistent ethical and governance standards. The use of Gen-AI models introduces substantial ethical and governance challenges including the generation of fabricated evidence, citation inaccuracies, violations of intellectual property, professional misrepresentation, and the erosion of human cognitive and compositional competencies. Existing responses to the Gen-AI challenges in literature remain fragmented, leaving uncertainty about acceptable assistance, disclosure, authorship and accountability regarding Gen-AI use. This study addresses the gaps by proposing an Integrated Risk-Based Framework for Responsible Generative AI Writing (IRF–GenAIW) for the responsible and accountable use of Gen-AI. Findings from the systematic literature review analysis of literature indicate that current institutional approaches are inconsistent and concentrate on issues of plagiarism and academic misconduct, with inadequate consideration of broader applications in professional and industrial sectors. The contribution of this study is that it shifts attention from whether Gen-AI is used to whether it is used responsibly and with integrity. It develops a risk-based Gen-AI framework that guides disclosure, verification, human oversight, authorship, confidentiality and accountability in Gen-AI use across various academic, professional and industrial sectors.
Downloads
References
Al-Kfairy, M., Mustafa, D., Kshetri, N., Insiew, M., & Alfandi, O. (2024). Ethical challenges and solutions of generative AI: An interdisciplinary perspective. Informatics, 11(3), Article 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics11030058
American Psychological Association. (2024). The promise and perils of using AI for research and writing. https://www.apa.org/topics/artificial-intelligence-machine-learning/ai-research-writing
Autio, C., Schwartz, R., Dunietz, J., Jain, S., Stanley, M., Tabassi, E., Hall, P., & Roberts, K. (2024). Artificial intelligence risk management framework: Generative artificial intelligence profile (NIST AI 600-1). National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.600-1
Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö., & Mariman, R. (2025). Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(26), Article e2422633122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2422633122
Bozkurt, A. (2024). GenAI et al.: Cocreation, authorship, ownership, academic ethics and integrity in a time of generative AI. Open Praxis, 16(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.16.1.654
Brynjolfsson, E., Li, D., & Raymond, L. R. (2025). Generative AI at work. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 140(2), 889–942. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjae044
Chelli, M., Descamps, J., Lavoué, V., Trojani, C., Azar, M., Deckert, M., Raynier, J.-L., Clowez, G., Boileau, P., & Ruetsch-Chelli, C. (2024). Hallucination rates and reference accuracy of ChatGPT and Bard for systematic reviews: Comparative analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 26, Article e53164. https://doi.org/10.2196/53164
Chetwynd, E. (2024). Ethical use of artificial intelligence for scientific writing: Current trends. Journal of Human Lactation, 40(2), 211–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/08903344241235160
Committee on Publication Ethics. (2023). Authorship and AI tools: COPE position statement. https://publicationethics.org/guidance/cope-position/authorship-and-ai-tools
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., Ahuja, M., Albanna, H., Albashrawi, M. A., Al-Busaidi, A. S., Balakrishnan, J., Barlette, Y., Basu, S., Bose, I., Brooks, L., Buhalis, D., . . . Wright, R. (2023). “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, Article 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
Eke, D. O. (2023). ChatGPT and the rise of generative AI: Threat to academic integrity? Journal of Responsible Technology, 13, Article 100060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrt.2023.100060
European Parliament, & Council of the European Union. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). Official Journal of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng
Faheemuddin, S. (2025). Exploring the role of artificial intelligence in predicting property value trends: A systematic review of machine learning applications in real estate pricing and risk assessment. American Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Innovation, 4(5), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajmri.v4i5.4815
Hidayatullah, M. H., Suryati, N., Cahyono, B. Y., & Mawaddah, N. (2025). A systematic literature review of artificial intelligence in academic writing: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Research on English and Language Learning, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.33474/j-reall.v6i2.23821
Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., . . . Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, Article 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Khalifa, M., & Albadawy, M. (2024). Using artificial intelligence in academic writing and research: An essential productivity tool. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine Update, 5, Article 100145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpbup.2024.100145
Li, S., Liu, J., & Dong, Q. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence-supported programming education: Effects on learning performance, self-efficacy and processes. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.9932
Liang, W., Yuksekgonul, M., Mao, Y., Wu, E., & Zou, J. (2023). GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers. Patterns, 4(7), Article 100779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2023.100779
Luo, J. (2024). A critical review of GenAI policies in higher education assessment: A call to reconsider the “originality” of students’ work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(5), 651–664. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2309963
Magesh, V., Surani, F., Dahl, M., Suzgun, M., Manning, C. D., & Ho, D. E. (2025). Hallucination-free? Assessing the reliability of leading AI legal research tools. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 22(2), 216–242. https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12413
Májovský, M., Černý, M., Kasal, M., Komarc, M., & Netuka, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence can generate fraudulent but authentic-looking scientific medical articles: Pandora’s box has been opened. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25, Article e46924. https://doi.org/10.2196/46924
Mata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F. Supp. 3d 443 (S.D.N.Y. 2023). https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2022cv01461/575368/54/
Miao, F., & Holmes, W. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386693
National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2023). Artificial intelligence risk management framework (AI RMF 1.0) (NIST AI 100-1). U.S. Department of Commerce. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1
Noy, S., & Zhang, W. (2023). Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative artificial intelligence. Science, 381(6654), 187–192. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adh2586
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2024). Recommendation of the Council on artificial intelligence (OECD/LEGAL/0449). https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0449
Perkins, M., Roe, J., Vu, B. H., Postma, D., Hickerson, D., McGaughran, J., & Khuat, H. Q. (2024). Simple techniques to bypass GenAI text detectors: Implications for inclusive education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, Article 53. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00487-w
Resnik, D. B., & Hosseini, M. (2025). The ethics of using artificial intelligence in scientific research: New guidance needed for a new tool. AI and Ethics, 5, 1499–1510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00493-8
Sharma, M. (2025). The ethical considerations of using GenAI and AI tools in academic writing in higher education: A systematic review. Kalika Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.3126/kjmr.v3i3.87215
Thawbaan, A., Dusserre, G., Yusuf, M. K., & Abdulkareem, Y. (2025). Sustainable cybersecurity in healthcare: An AI-integrated risk and resilience framework. American Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Innovation, 4(4), 144–154. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajmri.v4i4.5086
Weber-Wulff, D., Anohina-Naumeca, A., Bjelobaba, S., Foltýnek, T., Guerrero-Dib, J., Popoola, O., Šigut, P., & Waddington, L. (2023). Testing of detection tools for AI-generated text. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 19, Article 26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-00146-z
World Intellectual Property Organization. (2024). Generative AI: Navigating intellectual property. https://www.wipo.int/documents/d/frontier-technologies/docs-en-pdf-generative-ai-factsheet.pdf
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Richard Mulenga, Mildred Muhyila
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
