Loading...

From Pressure to Possibility: Rethinking ‘Publish or Perish’ in the Age of AI

By   Kaiser Jamil Jul 21, 2025 2189 19

For decades, academia has been dominated by the relentless mantra of publish or perish—the idea that success in research depends almost entirely on the frequency of publications. The pressure to produce papers, often at the expense of quality or innovation, has led to burnout, questionable research practices, and an elitist structure where only those with access to resources and mentorship could hope to thrive.

But with the advent of large language models (LLMs), such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT, this narrative is beginning to change. A new era of accessibility is unfolding. Graduate and postgraduate students are now publishing at a pace once thought possible only for seasoned researchers. Why? Because they are no longer working in isolation.

AI-powered tools like ChatGPT provide real-time support in brainstorming, literature review, structuring arguments, and refining academic language—just a prompt away. What once took weeks of painstaking effort can now be streamlined in hours, and without compromising intellectual ownership. I have personally witnessed this shift benefit hundreds of students, especially in non-English-speaking regions or institutions with limited academic support.

It’s not that AI is doing the thinking—it’s that it is removing much of the friction that surrounds scholarly writing.

A Democratized Publishing Landscape: What Comes Next?
This democratization of publishing raises important questions. If more people can publish more easily, how do we maintain academic rigor? What role will peer review play in a world where submissions multiply rapidly?

Institutions will need to adapt—not by clamping down, but by creating clearer standards around the ethical use of AI, and by emphasizing critical thinking over rote production. At the same time, the pressure in “publish or perish” may begin to erode. Publishing is becoming more feasible and inclusive, potentially creating space for more diverse voices, broader collaboration, and more innovative research environments.

Critics argue that AI might dilute authenticity or originality in academic work. But most users see tools like ChatGPT not as ghostwriters, but as collaborators. These technologies suggest structure, offer clarity, and highlight logical gaps—much like a peer or mentor might.

This new publishing paradigm reflects a deeper truth: many researchers have always had valuable ideas, but lacked the scaffolding to express them effectively. AI is simply helping bridge that gap.

Still a Daily Reality: The Cost of Constant Output
Despite the rise of supportive AI tools, the reality of publish or perish persists for many researchers. Careers, promotions, grant funding, and job security are still closely tied to publishing output. But what is the cost?

The pressure is reshaping not just how researchers work, but how they think, collaborate, and measure self-worth. In many cases, it’s leading to uncomfortable and harmful consequences.

Mental Health Impacts: The Invisible Cost
The toll on mental health is significant. A 2023 study in Health Science Reports revealed that early-career researchers, particularly PhD students, experience markedly higher levels of anxiety, depression, and emotional stress tied to academic pressures.

Common mental health challenges include:

  • Burnout: Driven by constant deadlines, rejection, and performance expectations
  • Imposter Syndrome: A persistent feeling of inadequacy despite achievements
  • Isolation: A competitive atmosphere that discourages collaboration and encourages secrecy

Institutions like University College London are beginning to implement dedicated mental health frameworks to support researcher well-being, a much-needed shift.

Ethical Consequences: When Quantity Beats Quality
When researchers are evaluated based on volume rather than the quality of their work, ethical pitfalls arise.

A 2023 review in Research Integrity and Peer Review highlighted practices such as:

  • Salami slicing: Splitting research into smaller publishable units to boost output
  • P-hacking: Tweaking data or statistical methods to obtain publishable results
  • Predatory publishing: Submitting to low-quality or deceptive journals to pad CVs

Even retractions are on the rise. According to Retraction Watch, the number of retracted scientific articles has increased significantly over the past decade, many due to data fabrication or misconduct under pressure. These practices damage individual careers and erode public trust in science.

The Impact on Science: More Isn’t Always Better
Focusing on quantity can distort the scientific process itself:

  • Replication Crisis: Hastily published or poorly designed studies are hard to replicate
  • Publication Bias: Journals favor positive results, neglecting important null or negative findings
  • Wasted Resources: Time, funding, and effort get funneled into producing more papers instead of meaningful discovery

A recent 2025 study shows that publication incentives are pushing researchers toward career survival over curiosity-driven research, a trend that risks long-term scientific progress.

Rethinking Evaluation: Beyond the Publication Count
There is good news. The academic community is beginning to recognize that publishing frequency alone cannot define scholarly value.

Emerging evaluation tools include:

  • Altmetrics: Captures research impact beyond citations, social media, news, policy, and public attention
  • Open Science Practices: Prioritizing transparency, reproducibility, and data sharing
  • Narrative CVs: Supported by funders like UKRI, allowing researchers to describe their broader contributions to science and society
  • DORA (San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment): Advocates for content-based assessment rather than journal prestige

These evolving approaches are helping to realign academic values and reduce pressure, while promoting integrity and inclusivity.

Conclusion: A Quiet Revolution
Science thrives when researchers have the freedom to ask big questions, take risks, and share honest results, even when outcomes are messy or unexpected. But when careers are tied to a relentless publishing treadmill, that freedom is compromised.

It’s time to accept that while publishing is important, it is not everything. Supporting mental health, promoting ethical research, and embracing broader evaluation frameworks will lead to a more resilient and vibrant scientific ecosystem.

We are witnessing a quiet revolution in academia. Where publishing was once a gatekeeper, it is now becoming a gateway, enabled by AI, but driven by human insight and curiosity.

Challenges remain in conducting good research, but sharing research has become more achievable than ever. And that shift makes a world of difference for the next generation of scholars.

If you’ve felt the pressure to publish or found new ways to define success beyond the journal count, we’d love to hear your story.

Keywords

Publish or perish academic pressure research integrity mental health in academia research ethics alternative metrics altmetrics narrative CV publication bias open science DORA declaration ChatGPT AI

Kaiser Jamil
Kaiser Jamil

Dr. Kaiser Jamil is a distinguished scientist with a rich academic background spanning institutions such as IICT and CCMB, premier CSIR institutes, as well as the University of Sydney in Australia and the University of Paris in France. Her pioneering research in biology has led to multidisciplinary exploration in various R&D domains. Recognized for her contributions, she was awarded the title of Emeritus Scientist by CSIR-New Delhi. Currently serving as the Head of the Genetics Department at Bhagwan Mahavir Medical Research Centre (BMMRC), India, Dr. Jamil has authored over 300 publications and is a fellow of several prestigious academies. Her notable discoveries include the polymorphic nature of genes influencing cancer therapeutics. With 45 Ph.D. students under her mentorship, her research interests encompass Cancer Biology, Genetics, Pharmacogenomics, and disease biomarkers.

View All Posts by Kaiser Jamil

Recent Articles

Continuing the Conversation: ACSE Hosts Dynamic Webinar on Responsible AI in Scholarly Publishing
Continuing the Conversation: ACSE Hosts Dynamic Webinar on Responsible AI in Scholarly Publishing

On Tuesday, July 23, 2025, at 3:00 PM Gulf Standard Time (GST), The Asian Council of Science Editors (ACSE) hosted a highly e...

Read more ⟶

Are Good Practices In Peer Review Really Good?
Are Good Practices In Peer Review Really Good?

Over the past five decades or so, ‘peer review’ has become an inseparable element of academic journal publishing. In my r...

Read more ⟶

Gatekeeping Reimagined: Elevating Editorial Workflows Through Responsible AI
Gatekeeping Reimagined: Elevating Editorial Workflows Through Responsible AI

The scholarly publishing landscape is undergoing rapid transformation, driven by advances in AI, automation, and the growing ...

Read more ⟶