{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "ScholarlyArticle",
  "@id": "https://miklian.org/papers/what-is-an-academic-article-for-scholarly-work-agentic-ai#article",
  "headline": "What is an Academic Article For? The Production of Scholarly Work and its Meaning in an Agentic AI World",
  "name": "What is an Academic Article For? The Production of Scholarly Work and its Meaning in an Agentic AI World",
  "author": [
    {
      "@type": "Person",
      "name": "Jason Miklian",
      "sameAs": [
        "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1227-0975",
        "https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=RHlevGEAAAAJ&hl=en",
        "https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jason-Miklian",
        "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q47107618",
        "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Miklian",
        "https://www.globe.uio.no/english/people/aca/jasontm/",
        "https://www.prio.org/people/5833",
        "https://jasonmiklian.com"
      ],
      "@id": "https://miklian.org/#person"
    }
  ],
  "datePublished": "2026",
  "isPartOf": {
    "@type": "Periodical",
    "name": "Under Review"
  },
  "url": "https://miklian.org/papers/what-is-an-academic-article-for-scholarly-work-agentic-ai",
  "abstract": "Agentic AI tools are already embedded in every stage of the social science research lifecycle, yet social science scholars lack a framework for governing this integration. This article argues that productive governance requires answering a question the social sciences generally have left implicit but that scholars will have to confront head-on: what is an academic article for? We conducted two empirical tests to show that AI language increased 151% in social science-affiliated journals from 2022 to 2025, while at the same time almost none of the world’s top universities have coherent guidance for scholars on how to use AI in their work. This article therefore develops a typology of scholarly knowledge work, mapping a gradient from activities where AI capability is already substantial to those where the scholar’s cognitive engagement constitutes the contribution itself. It reframes agentic AI as a rupture in the scholar-knowledge relationship rather than an acceleration of existing pressures, and demonstrates that agentic AI operates differently across epistemological traditions. For positivist research, substance and process are separable, whereas for interpretivist scholarship, they are not. The article proposes three governance principles and identifies three scales of inequality that any framework must address, and closes with guidance on how to navigate this shift responsibly.",
  "keywords": [
    "agentic AI",
    "knowledge production",
    "epistemology",
    "social science",
    "peer review",
    "academic governance",
    "intellectual formation",
    "generative AI"
  ],
  "license": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/",
  "isAccessibleForFree": true,
  "inLanguage": "en"
}