Why "Make It Academic" Is a Bad AI Prompt for Researchers

Many researchers writing in English as a second language use AI to improve the tone of their manuscript. The goal is reasonable: the science is clear, but the wording may sound too simple, too direct, or not “academic” enough.

So they paste a sentence into an AI tool and write: “Make it academic.”

The result looks better at first glance. Vocabulary becomes more formal. Sentences become longer. But this prompt can create problems for research writing: unclear meaning, exaggerated claims, unnecessary complexity, and wording that is not grounded in the sources.

For researchers, especially those writing in English as a second language, the better goal is not to sound academic. The goal is to communicate the scientific meaning clearly, accurately, and appropriately for a journal audience. That is why wisio.app is built around a research writing workflow: draft in a focused editor, get AI feedback, and work with your own sources while you write.

Why “make it academic” usually gives weak results

The phrase “make it academic” is too vague. It does not tell the AI what kind of change you need.

Do you want the sentence to be more concise, formal, precise, cautious, or easier for peer reviewers to understand? Because the instruction is unclear, the AI may choose the most visible form of “academic” language: longer words and more complex sentence structures.

For example:

Original sentence: We looked at how the drug affects cell growth.

AI revision from “make it academic”: We conducted an investigation into the manner in which the pharmacological agent exerts influence upon cellular proliferation.

This sounds more formal, but it is not necessarily better. It is longer and less direct. In scientific writing, every wording change can affect the strength or scope of the claim.

A better revision might be: “We examined the effect of the drug on cell growth.” This version is clear, formal enough, and easier to read.

The danger of inflated claims

One major risk of “make it academic” prompts is that AI may strengthen claims without evidence.

Original sentence: Our results suggest that treatment A may reduce inflammation.

Bad AI revision: Our findings demonstrate that treatment A significantly reduces inflammation.

The revised sentence sounds more confident, but it may be inaccurate. “Suggest” became “demonstrate.” “May reduce” became “significantly reduces.” Unless your study design, statistical analysis, and results support that claim, the revision is not safe.

For research manuscripts, cautious language matters. Words such as “may,” “suggest,” “indicate,” “associated with,” and “consistent with” are not signs of weak English. They are tools for scientific accuracy. For more on writing with precision in English, see Scientific Writing Precision with Online English Correction.

A better prompt would be:

Prompt: Improve the academic style of this sentence while keeping the claim cautious and not adding any result that is not stated.

Possible revision: “Our results suggest that treatment A may be associated with reduced inflammation.”

This is more polished, but it preserves the uncertainty.

Academic English is not complicated English

Strong academic writing is simple, precise, and structured.

Compare these two sentences:

Overwritten version: It is of considerable importance to note that the obtained findings provide a meaningful contribution to the existing body of literature regarding the phenomenon under investigation.

Clear version: These findings contribute to the literature on this phenomenon.

The second sentence is more readable. Reviewers and editors need to understand your research question, methods, results, and interpretation without struggling through inflated language.

For researchers writing in English as a second language, this is important: your writing does not need to imitate the most complex papers you have read. It needs to be accurate and easy to follow. If English is not your first language, you may also find Writing publication-ready English when it isn’t your first language useful.

Use specific AI prompts instead

Instead of asking AI to “make it academic,” use prompts that describe the exact writing problem.

Better alternatives include:

• Revise this sentence for clarity while preserving the scientific meaning.
• Make this sentence more formal for a research manuscript, but do not add new claims.
• Make this paragraph more concise without removing important methodological details.
• Improve the transition between these two sentences so the logic is clearer.
• Revise this sentence for academic style while keeping uncertainty words such as “may,” “suggest,” and “associated with” where appropriate.
• Identify which claims in this paragraph need a citation or stronger source support.

These prompts give the AI a clear task. They also remind it not to invent meaning. In wisio.app, this kind of focused revision is especially useful because researchers can draft and improve text while working with their own sources. The writing process becomes less about generic rewriting and more about developing a manuscript that stays connected to the evidence.

Example: turn a weak prompt into a useful one

Imagine you are writing a discussion section.

Draft: The intervention improved patient outcomes, but more studies are needed.

If you ask “make it academic,” you might get:

Generic revision: The intervention substantially enhanced patient outcomes; however, further comprehensive investigations are warranted to validate these findings.

This revision may be too strong. “Improved” became “substantially enhanced,” and “more studies are needed” became “further comprehensive investigations are warranted.” It sounds polished, but it may imply more certainty than your data supports.

A better prompt is:

Prompt: Revise this sentence for a discussion section. Keep the claim cautious and do not imply causation beyond the study results.

Better revision: “The intervention was associated with improved patient outcomes, although further studies are needed to confirm these findings.”

This version is formal, cautious, and clearer.

Ask for feedback before rewriting

Sometimes the best AI task is not rewriting. It is feedback. Before asking for a polished version, ask: “What is unclear in this paragraph for a journal reviewer?” or “Does this paragraph contain any wording that may overstate the results?”

This helps you understand the problem instead of accepting a full rewrite that may change your meaning.

Source-grounded writing is safer

Generic AI tools can produce fluent text even when they do not know your sources. That fluency can be risky. A sentence may sound excellent but still misrepresent the literature.

For research writing, a better workflow is:

1. Draft the claim in your own words.
2. Check which source supports the claim.
3. Revise the sentence for clarity and tone.
4. Confirm that the revision still matches the source.
5. Add or verify the citation.

This is where source-grounded AI writing matters. The AI should help you express your point, but the evidence should come from your paper, your data, and your selected literature. For a deeper explanation, read Why grounded AI beats generic AI for scientific writing and Finding references that actually exist: PubMed & Crossref, explained.

With wisio.app, researchers can write with AI feedback while citing from PubMed and Crossref without leaving the paper. That reduces the temptation to use vague prompts and helps keep the manuscript connected to real sources.

Conclusion

“Make it academic” is a tempting AI prompt, but it is not specific enough for serious research writing. It can make sentences longer, stronger, or more complex without making them more accurate.

Researchers writing in English as a second language do not need generic academic-sounding text. They need clear, precise, source-grounded writing that protects scientific meaning.

A better approach is to use focused prompts: improve clarity, preserve caution, reduce wordiness, check flow, or identify unsupported claims. This helps AI become a writing assistant rather than a rewriting machine.

If you want to draft your manuscript in a focused environment, get AI feedback, and work with PubMed and Crossref sources as you write, wisio.app can support a more reliable research writing workflow—without asking AI to simply “make it academic.”