Voices

Fabio Ynoe de Moraes: Two Very Different Stories are Emerging About AI in Research

Fabio Ynoe de Moraes/scri.queensu.ca

Sep 5, 2025, 12:59

Fabio Ynoe de Moraes: Two Very Different Stories are Emerging About AI in Research

Fabio Ynoe de Moraes, Associate Professor at Queen’s University, shared a post on LinkedIn:

“Two very different stories are emerging about AI in research.

For some, AI feels like a miracle.
It drafts cleaner discussion sections, restructures introductions, polishes language.
It accelerates tasks that researchers have always done—just like email replaced the fax machine, AI makes long-standing processes faster and more efficient.

But there’s also a quieter, more concerning story.
AI is introducing new behaviors into research that never existed before:

Using it to “summarize the field” instead of doing the deep work of reading.

→ It feels efficient, but misreadings slip through, citations distort, and researchers end up working from someone else’s blurry map instead of truly knowing the landscape.

Spending hours chasing “AI-detector safe” phrasing.
→ An entire cycle of paraphrasing that only exists because AI was misused in the first place—clarity and voice are the first casualties.

A simple heuristic helps separate value from distraction:
• If a process has always been part of research (brainstorming, editing, formatting), AI can amplify it.
• If AI is creating a new behavior that wasn’t part of the job before, it’s usually distraction and drift.

The lesson is clear:
Use AI to strengthen time-tested systems—not to invent new ones.
Anchor it to workflows that already matter. That’s where it consistently delivers real, lasting value.

How are you using AI in your workflow—amplifier or distraction?”

More from Fabio Ynoe de Moraes on OncoDaily.