essay titles for decisions

International
Education Jobs
Schools directory
Resources Education Jobs Schools directory News Search

Comprehensive TOK Essay Guide for 2025 Titles

Subject: Philosophy and ethics

Age range: 16+

Resource type: Other

Last updated

3 September 2024

Share through email
Share through twitter
Share through linkedin
Share through facebook
Share through pinterest

This document offers an in-depth analysis of the 2025 IB Theory of Knowledge (TOK) essay titles. Ideal for students aiming for a high pass grade, it breaks down each title thoroughly, providing:

Detailed Unpacking of Key Concepts: Clear explanations of each title, ensuring you understand exactly what’s being asked.

Expert Analysis of Areas of Knowledge (AOKs): Insightful connections between the essay titles and various AOKs, such as History, Natural Sciences, Mathematics, and the Arts.

Real-World Examples: Concrete examples tailored to each essay question, which can be directly used or adapted in your writing.

Critical Argumentation Tips: Guidance on how to craft balanced, coherent arguments, including how to integrate counterarguments.

Conclusion Strategies: Learn how to effectively conclude your essay with clarity and depth.

This guide provides everything you need to confidently tackle the TOK essay titles for 2025, making it a valuable resource for IB students looking to maximize their scores.

Tes paid licence How can I reuse this?

Your rating is required to reflect your happiness.

It's good to leave some feedback.

Something went wrong, please try again later.

This resource hasn't been reviewed yet

To ensure quality for our reviews, only customers who have purchased this resource can review it

Report this resource to let us know if it violates our terms and conditions. Our customer service team will review your report and will be in touch.

Not quite what you were looking for? Search by keyword to find the right resource:

Thesis Statement Examples

Practical Thesis Statement Examples That Will Transform Your Writing

10 min read

Published on: Sep 3, 2024

Last updated on: Sep 3, 2024

What Is A Thesis Statement?

A thesis statement is a key part of your essay that tells readers what your essay is about. It’s a clear sentence that sums up the main point or argument you’re going to make. Think of it as a guide that helps your readers understand your main idea and what to expect from your essay.

Your thesis statement usually goes at the end of your introduction. It gives your essay direction and helps keep everything focused on your main point.

Examples Of Thesis Statements By Essay Type

To help you see how to write effective thesis statements, here are thesis statement examples for essays of various types. Each example will give you a clearer picture of how to approach various topics.

Examples Of Thesis Statements For Personal Essays

A personal essay thesis statement reflects your unique experiences and feelings. It shares a central idea about a personal story or insight you’re discussing.

Here are a few examples to give you an idea of how to craft your own:

Overcoming my fear of public speaking taught me that courage is not the absence of fear, but the ability to act despite it.
Traveling to a new country showed me that stepping out of my comfort zone is the best way to grow and learn.
My experience of balancing school and a part-time job proved that hard work and dedication can lead to personal success and self-discovery.

Thesis Statement Examples For Informative Essay

A thesis statement for an informative essay provides a clear and specific overview of the topic you’re explaining. It helps readers understand the focus of your essay and what information they can expect to learn.

Let’s take a look at some informative thesis statement examples :

The process of photosynthesis is essential for plant growth as it converts sunlight into energy and produces oxygen, which is crucial for life on Earth.
The history of the internet reveals how technological advancements have transformed communication, from early networks to the modern web.
Understanding the basics of genetic inheritance can explain how traits are passed from parents to offspring and how genetic disorders can occur.

Thesis Statement Examples For Compare And Contrast Essays

A thesis statement for a compare and contrast essay highlights the similarities and differences between two or more subjects. It helps readers understand the main points of comparison and what you will be discussing.

Some examples are:

While both public and private schools aim to provide quality education, they differ significantly in terms of funding, curriculum flexibility, and student-to-teacher ratios.
Although electric cars and gasoline-powered cars serve the same purpose of transportation, they differ in their environmental impact, cost, and efficiency.
The lifestyles of city dwellers and rural residents differ greatly, with urban areas offering more job opportunities and amenities, while rural areas provide a slower pace of life and closer connection to nature.

Argumentative Essay Thesis Statement Examples

A thesis statement for an argumentative essay clearly states your opinion on a hot topic and explains why you hold that view. It shows what you believe and what you’ll be arguing for.

Below are some argumentative thesis statement examples :

A universal basic income can help reduce poverty and provide financial stability, making it a crucial step toward reducing economic inequality.
Renewable energy is vital for fighting climate change because it cuts down on greenhouse gas emissions and supports a healthier planet.
Requiring school uniforms in public schools can decrease peer pressure and help students focus more on their studies.

Thesis Statement Examples For Persuasive Essay

A thesis statement for a persuasive essay aims to convince the reader of a particular viewpoint. It presents your position and hints at the arguments you’ll use to support it.

Some examples include:

Adopting a plant-based diet is beneficial for health and the environment, as it reduces the risk of chronic diseases and decreases ecological footprints.
Investing in public transportation improves urban mobility and reduces traffic congestion, leading to a more efficient and eco-friendly city.
Banning single-use plastics is essential to protect marine life and reduce pollution, helping to preserve the environment for future generations.

Analytical Essay Thesis Statement Examples

A thesis statement for an analytical essay breaks down a topic and examines its components. It highlights what you will analyze and what insights or conclusions you aim to provide.

Here are some good thesis statement examples for analytical essays:

Analyzing Shakespeare’s use of imagery in "Macbeth" reveals how it enhances the play’s themes of ambition and guilt.
Examining the impact of social media on communication shows how it has changed the way we interact and perceive relationships.
The portrayal of leadership in “The Great Gatsby” illustrates how wealth and power can corrupt moral values and influence behavior.

Expository Essay Thesis Statement Examples

A thesis statement for an expository essay explains a topic or idea in detail. It provides a clear summary of what the essay will cover and how it will inform the reader.

See the examples mentioned below:

The process of recycling involves several key steps, including sorting materials, processing them into raw materials, and creating new products.
The history of the internet highlights key milestones such as the development of early networks, the rise of the World Wide Web, and the evolution of online communication.
Understanding the causes of climate change requires examining factors like greenhouse gas emissions, deforestation, and industrial activities.

Process Essay Thesis Statement Examples

A thesis statement for a process essay explains how something is done or how a process works. It gives a clear overview of the steps involved. Take a glance at these examples :

Making homemade pizza involves preparing the dough, adding toppings, and baking it to create a delicious and customizable meal.
The steps to start a small business include researching the market, creating a business plan, and securing funding to ensure a successful launch.
Learning a new language requires practicing speaking and listening skills, studying grammar, and immersing oneself in the language through reading and conversation.

Thesis Statement Examples According to Different Academic Levels

Writing a thesis statement changes as you move through different study levels. Each stage has its own approach and complexity. Here’s how thesis statements might look across different levels:

Thesis Statement Examples for Kids

At a basic level, thesis statements for kids are simple and direct. They usually focus on familiar topics and straightforward ideas. Consider these examples :

Dogs make great pets because they are loyal, fun, and good with kids.
Reading books is important because it helps you learn new things and improves your imagination.

Middle School Thesis Statement Examples

In middle school, thesis statements start to involve more detail and support. They reflect a better understanding of how to structure arguments. Here are some examples :

School uniforms should be required because they promote equality, reduce distractions, and make it easier for students to focus on their studies.
Eating a balanced diet is crucial for maintaining good health because it provides essential nutrients, boosts energy levels, and helps prevent diseases.

High School Thesis Statement Examples

High school thesis statements are more sophisticated, often including a clear argument and multiple supporting points. Take a look these examples :

The benefits of online learning outweigh the drawbacks because it offers flexibility, access to a wide range of resources, and the ability to balance education with other responsibilities.
Participating in extracurricular activities is important for high school students as it helps develop leadership skills, build friendships, and enhance college applications.

College Thesis Statement Examples

At the college level, thesis statements are complex and detailed and often address more complex arguments. Examples include:

Implementing renewable energy solutions, such as solar and wind power, is essential for reducing our reliance on fossil fuels and mitigating the effects of climate change.
The rise of social media has transformed political campaigning by increasing voter engagement, spreading misinformation, and altering traditional campaign strategies.

Thesis Statement Examples for Research Papers

For research papers, thesis statements must be well-researched and specific and provide a clear direction for the study. Consider these examples :

Exploring the effects of childhood trauma on adult mental health reveals significant correlations between early experiences and the development of psychological disorders later in life.
Investigating the impact of artificial intelligence on the job market shows that while AI creates new opportunities, it also poses challenges related to job displacement and workforce adaptation.

More Examples Of Thesis Statements

As you work on different essays and writing tasks, you’ll see that thesis statements can vary a lot. Here are some additional examples to illustrate their diversity.

Literary Analysis Thesis Statement Examples

In "To Kill a Mockingbird," Harper Lee uses symbolism, such as the mockingbird, to highlight the themes of innocence and moral growth.
The use of unreliable narrators in Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Tell-Tale Heart” enhances the story’s exploration of guilt and madness.

Implied Thesis Statement Examples

Despite its surface simplicity, “The Little Prince” offers a profound critique of adult behavior through its exploration of human nature and relationships.
The persistent use of color imagery in “The Great Gatsby” subtly emphasizes the theme of the American Dream and its inherent flaws.

Thesis Statement Examples For Research Papers

Examining the effects of sleep deprivation on academic performance shows a direct link between lack of sleep and reduced cognitive abilities in students.
Research into the impact of climate change on coastal ecosystems reveals that rising sea levels and increased temperatures are threatening biodiversity and habitat stability.

Complex Thesis Statement Examples

While the integration of technology in education offers numerous benefits, such as personalized learning and greater accessibility, it also presents challenges related to screen time and data privacy.
The debate over genetic engineering in agriculture involves both potential benefits, like increased crop yields and disease resistance, and ethical concerns, such as environmental impact and genetic diversity.

In closing,

A strong thesis statement is the backbone of any good essay. It helps guide your writing and keeps your readers focused on your main point. With the examples provided, you can see how to shape your thesis for different types of essays and academic levels.

If you want a little extra help with your thesis statements, check out the thesis statement generator from MyEssayWriter.ai . It’s a handy tool that can help you create and perfect your thesis statements quickly.

For extra help with essay writing, check out our essay writer . It's an AI tool that can write high-quality essays for you in a breeze!

Frequently Asked Questions

How do i write my thesis statement.

To write and start a thesis statement, you should:

Pick Your Topic: Decide what your essay will be about.
Formulate Your Argument: Choose your main point or stance on the topic.
Be Specific: Make sure your statement clearly outlines what you'll discuss.
Make It Debatable: Your thesis should present an argument that can be supported with evidence.
Keep It Concise: Aim for one or two sentences that clearly express your main idea.

What 3 things should a thesis statement have?

Typically, a thesis statement format includes three main parts: the topic you're discussing, your main argument or viewpoint , and the reasons or evidence you'll use to back up that argument.

What is an example of a weak and strong thesis statement?

Weak Thesis Statement: "Social media is bad."

It's too broad and lacks detail.

Strong Thesis Statement: "Social media platforms negatively impact mental health by increasing anxiety and depression among teenagers, and this can be addressed through improved online safety measures."

It's specific, takes a clear stance, and hints at the main points of the essay.

What is a thesis statement sentence?

A thesis statement sentence is a single sentence in your essay that summarizes your main point or argument. It’s usually found at the end of your introduction and guides the rest of your essay.

Caleb S. (Mass Literature and Linguistics, Masters)

Caleb S. is an accomplished author with over five years of experience and a Master's degree from Oxford University. He excels in various writing forms, including articles, press releases, blog posts, and whitepapers. As a valued author at MyEssayWriter.ai, Caleb assists students and professionals by providing practical tips on research, citation, sentence structure, and style enhancement.

On This Page On This Page

Get Access to Advanced Features with our Affordable Plans

Complimentary Trial

Continue for FREE

OFFER ENDS Today

Signup for Free Access

Access to all Tools

No Credit Card needed

Quota: 1500 Words (6 pages)

Offer ends in: 03hr 19m 8s

Already a user? Login instead

For Monthly Usage

$ 9.99 /month

Up to 2500 words/month

Access to all features

AI Essay Writer

AI Essay Outliner

Go Big Monthly!

$ 14.99 /month

Up to 100,000 words/month

Access to all existing tools

50% off on custom essay orders

500 credits for plagiarism check

Top Annual Savings!

Advanced (4 Months FREE )

$ 99.99 /year

OFFER ENDS Soon

Unlimited essays

12 Months for the price of 8

Access to all upcoming tools

Get started for free

Please enter a valid Name

Please enter a valid email address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Please enter atleast five characters

Please enter a valid Password

Show Password

Already have an account? Sign In here.

Please enter your email address

Forgot Password?

Don’t have an account? Sign Up

Verify Your Account

Enter the verification codes to confirm your identity.

Code sent to [email protected]

Send again in seconds

Code sent to +1 302 385 6690

Claim Free Essay

Your first custom essay order on our website is FREE!

Watch CBS News

Supreme Court won't stop Biden administration from withholding Title X funding from Oklahoma

By Melissa Quinn

Updated on: September 3, 2024 / 4:57 PM EDT / CBS News

Washington — The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a request from Oklahoma officials seeking to restore federal family planning grant funding to the state's health department after it refused to offer patients a hotline phone number that would provide counseling on pregnancy options, including abortion.

The justices turned down the bid for emergency relief from the state, which had asked the Supreme Court to temporarily stop the Department of Health and Human Services from withholding $4.5 million in federal Title X funding from the Oklahoma State Department of Health. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch said they would have granted Oklahoma's request.

The dispute is the latest involving abortion to land before the nation's highest court in the wake of its June 2022 decision overturning Roe v. Wade . As more than half of the states banned or imposed stringent restrictions on abortions following the ruling, including Oklahoma, the Biden administration has sought to protect access at the federal level, including through an emergency care law that was at the center of a dispute before the justices in its most recent term.

The fight over Title X funding

The rule that gave rise to the case involving Title X funding for Oklahoma was announced in October 2021, months before Roe's reversal. It requires Title X projects to offer pregnant patients "nondirective counseling" about family planning options, including abortion, as well as information about where services can be obtained if requested by a patient.

The Oklahoma State Department of Health received a Title X grant in 2022, which was used to provide funding to city and county health departments. After the Supreme Court rolled back the constitutional right to abortion, the department and the Biden administration discussed changing the counseling and referral policies for its Title X project, as a new Oklahoma law outlawed abortion, according to court filings. The measure also made it a felony for a person to advise or procure an abortion for a pregnant woman.

The two entities reached an agreement under which the state health department could comply with the 2021 rule by ensuring interested Title X patients were offered the phone number of a national hotline that would provide counseling and referral information. Based on the accommodation, the Department of Health and Human Services agreed to provide $4.5 million to the state agency from April 2023 through March 2024.

But the Oklahoma health department soon reversed course and said Title X patients who seek pregnancy counseling wouldn't be provided with the call-in number, according to a Justice Department filing. As a result, the Biden administration eventually terminated the award because it said the state was violating its 2021 rule.

Oklahoma officials sued the federal government over its decision and sought to temporarily block termination of its award and force the Department of Health and Human Services to provide additional funding in the future. The state argued the Biden administration violated the Constitution's Spending Clause and a federal conscience law known as the Weldon Amendment by withholding the Title X funds.

The Department of Health and Human Services prevailed before the federal district court and U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. The appeals court ruled that Congress allowed the federal government to determine eligibility for Title X grants, which are subject to conditions deemed appropriate by the secretary of health and human services.

The divided 10th Circuit three-judge panel also found it unlikely that the Biden administration violated the Weldon Amendment, in part because the state failed to prove that the federal government discriminated against it for declining to refer pregnant women for abortions.

Oklahoma's Supreme Court request

In seeking relief from the Supreme Court, Oklahoma officials claimed the state department of health was stripped of $4.5 million "solely" because it will not provide abortion referrals. They said the Title X funds are crucial to Oklahoma's provision of family planning services through local health departments, and warned that depriving the state's rural and urban communities of Title X services would be "devastating."

Citing Supreme Court precedent, the state argued the federal government cannot impose on it an obligation to provide abortion referrals when it is not clearly required by Title X.

"HHS's regulation foists upon Oklahoma a requirement concerning an issue that has been recognized as specifically reserved to the people to address in Dobbs," Oklahoma officials wrote in a filing , referring to the Supreme Court's 2022 decision reversing Roe. They continued, "HHS deliberately sought to impose the executive branch's policy preferences on the states, including Oklahoma, and upset the federal-state balance on this important issue."

But the Justice Department argued that nothing in the case impacts Oklahoma's ability to regulate abortion within its borders and questioned how referring patients to a hotline could violate the state's prohibition on advising or procuring an abortion.

The Oklahoma State Department of Health could also decline the Title X award, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar wrote in a filing .

"HHS determined that counseling and referral are 'critical for the delivery of quality, client-centered care.' Without them, patients would be deprived of neutral information about 'all pregnancy options,'" she wrote. "That runs squarely counter to Title X's fundamental goal."

Oklahoma had asked the Supreme Court to issue its decision by Aug. 30, the Biden administration's deadline for when it would begin distributing the federal dollars to other entities.

A similar dispute over Title X funding for Tennessee is also playing out in the courts. That case involves a $7 million grant the Biden administration declined to issue after the state wouldn't agree to provide Title X patients with the national call-in hotline where operators would supply them with referral information.

Tennessee, like Oklahoma, outlawed most abortions in the state after the Supreme Court overturned Roe, and said it would only offer to provide information and counseling for "all options that are legal" in the state.

A federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit declined to block the Biden administration from discontinuing the funding.

Melissa Quinn is a politics reporter for CBSNews.com. She has written for outlets including the Washington Examiner, Daily Signal and Alexandria Times. Melissa covers U.S. politics, with a focus on the Supreme Court and federal courts.

More from CBS News

Trump campaign must stop using Isaac Hayes song after lawsuit from family

Ketanji Brown Jackson says she's open to enforceable Supreme Court ethics code

Justice Jackson defends Idaho abortion dissent

Highlights from Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's CBS News interview

Peer Reviewed

GPT-fabricated scientific papers on Google Scholar: Key features, spread, and implications for preempting evidence manipulation

Article metrics.

CrossRef Citations

Altmetric Score

PDF Downloads

Academic journals, archives, and repositories are seeing an increasing number of questionable research papers clearly produced using generative AI. They are often created with widely available, general-purpose AI applications, most likely ChatGPT, and mimic scientific writing. Google Scholar easily locates and lists these questionable papers alongside reputable, quality-controlled research. Our analysis of a selection of questionable GPT-fabricated scientific papers found in Google Scholar shows that many are about applied, often controversial topics susceptible to disinformation: the environment, health, and computing. The resulting enhanced potential for malicious manipulation of society’s evidence base, particularly in politically divisive domains, is a growing concern.

Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås, Sweden

Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University, Sweden

Division of Environmental Communication, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden

Research Questions

Where are questionable publications produced with generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs) that can be found via Google Scholar published or deposited?
What are the main characteristics of these publications in relation to predominant subject categories?
How are these publications spread in the research infrastructure for scholarly communication?
How is the role of the scholarly communication infrastructure challenged in maintaining public trust in science and evidence through inappropriate use of generative AI?

research note Summary

A sample of scientific papers with signs of GPT-use found on Google Scholar was retrieved, downloaded, and analyzed using a combination of qualitative coding and descriptive statistics. All papers contained at least one of two common phrases returned by conversational agents that use large language models (LLM) like OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Google Search was then used to determine the extent to which copies of questionable, GPT-fabricated papers were available in various repositories, archives, citation databases, and social media platforms.
Roughly two-thirds of the retrieved papers were found to have been produced, at least in part, through undisclosed, potentially deceptive use of GPT. The majority (57%) of these questionable papers dealt with policy-relevant subjects (i.e., environment, health, computing), susceptible to influence operations. Most were available in several copies on different domains (e.g., social media, archives, and repositories).
Two main risks arise from the increasingly common use of GPT to (mass-)produce fake, scientific publications. First, the abundance of fabricated “studies” seeping into all areas of the research infrastructure threatens to overwhelm the scholarly communication system and jeopardize the integrity of the scientific record. A second risk lies in the increased possibility that convincingly scientific-looking content was in fact deceitfully created with AI tools and is also optimized to be retrieved by publicly available academic search engines, particularly Google Scholar. However small, this possibility and awareness of it risks undermining the basis for trust in scientific knowledge and poses serious societal risks.

Implications

The use of ChatGPT to generate text for academic papers has raised concerns about research integrity. Discussion of this phenomenon is ongoing in editorials, commentaries, opinion pieces, and on social media (Bom, 2023; Stokel-Walker, 2024; Thorp, 2023). There are now several lists of papers suspected of GPT misuse, and new papers are constantly being added. 1 See for example Academ-AI, https://www.academ-ai.info/ , and Retraction Watch, https://retractionwatch.com/papers-and-peer-reviews-with-evidence-of-chatgpt-writing/ . While many legitimate uses of GPT for research and academic writing exist (Huang & Tan, 2023; Kitamura, 2023; Lund et al., 2023), its undeclared use—beyond proofreading—has potentially far-reaching implications for both science and society, but especially for their relationship. It, therefore, seems important to extend the discussion to one of the most accessible and well-known intermediaries between science, but also certain types of misinformation, and the public, namely Google Scholar, also in response to the legitimate concerns that the discussion of generative AI and misinformation needs to be more nuanced and empirically substantiated (Simon et al., 2023).

Google Scholar, https://scholar.google.com , is an easy-to-use academic search engine. It is available for free, and its index is extensive (Gusenbauer & Haddaway, 2020). It is also often touted as a credible source for academic literature and even recommended in library guides, by media and information literacy initiatives, and fact checkers (Tripodi et al., 2023). However, Google Scholar lacks the transparency and adherence to standards that usually characterize citation databases. Instead, Google Scholar uses automated crawlers, like Google’s web search engine (Martín-Martín et al., 2021), and the inclusion criteria are based on primarily technical standards, allowing any individual author—with or without scientific affiliation—to upload papers to be indexed (Google Scholar Help, n.d.). It has been shown that Google Scholar is susceptible to manipulation through citation exploits (Antkare, 2020) and by providing access to fake scientific papers (Dadkhah et al., 2017). A large part of Google Scholar’s index consists of publications from established scientific journals or other forms of quality-controlled, scholarly literature. However, the index also contains a large amount of gray literature, including student papers, working papers, reports, preprint servers, and academic networking sites, as well as material from so-called “questionable” academic journals, including paper mills. The search interface does not offer the possibility to filter the results meaningfully by material type, publication status, or form of quality control, such as limiting the search to peer-reviewed material.

To understand the occurrence of ChatGPT (co-)authored work in Google Scholar’s index, we scraped it for publications, including one of two common ChatGPT responses (see Appendix A) that we encountered on social media and in media reports (DeGeurin, 2024). The results of our descriptive statistical analyses showed that around 62% did not declare the use of GPTs. Most of these GPT-fabricated papers were found in non-indexed journals and working papers, but some cases included research published in mainstream scientific journals and conference proceedings. 2 Indexed journals mean scholarly journals indexed by abstract and citation databases such as Scopus and Web of Science, where the indexation implies journals with high scientific quality. Non-indexed journals are journals that fall outside of this indexation. More than half (57%) of these GPT-fabricated papers concerned policy-relevant subject areas susceptible to influence operations. To avoid increasing the visibility of these publications, we abstained from referencing them in this research note. However, we have made the data available in the Harvard Dataverse repository.

The publications were related to three issue areas—health (14.5%), environment (19.5%) and computing (23%)—with key terms such “healthcare,” “COVID-19,” or “infection”for health-related papers, and “analysis,” “sustainable,” and “global” for environment-related papers. In several cases, the papers had titles that strung together general keywords and buzzwords, thus alluding to very broad and current research. These terms included “biology,” “telehealth,” “climate policy,” “diversity,” and “disrupting,” to name just a few. While the study’s scope and design did not include a detailed analysis of which parts of the articles included fabricated text, our dataset did contain the surrounding sentences for each occurrence of the suspicious phrases that formed the basis for our search and subsequent selection. Based on that, we can say that the phrases occurred in most sections typically found in scientific publications, including the literature review, methods, conceptual and theoretical frameworks, background, motivation or societal relevance, and even discussion. This was confirmed during the joint coding, where we read and discussed all articles. It became clear that not just the text related to the telltale phrases was created by GPT, but that almost all articles in our sample of questionable articles likely contained traces of GPT-fabricated text everywhere.

Evidence hacking and backfiring effects

Generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs) can be used to produce texts that mimic scientific writing. These texts, when made available online—as we demonstrate—leak into the databases of academic search engines and other parts of the research infrastructure for scholarly communication. This development exacerbates problems that were already present with less sophisticated text generators (Antkare, 2020; Cabanac & Labbé, 2021). Yet, the public release of ChatGPT in 2022, together with the way Google Scholar works, has increased the likelihood of lay people (e.g., media, politicians, patients, students) coming across questionable (or even entirely GPT-fabricated) papers and other problematic research findings. Previous research has emphasized that the ability to determine the value and status of scientific publications for lay people is at stake when misleading articles are passed off as reputable (Haider & Åström, 2017) and that systematic literature reviews risk being compromised (Dadkhah et al., 2017). It has also been highlighted that Google Scholar, in particular, can be and has been exploited for manipulating the evidence base for politically charged issues and to fuel conspiracy narratives (Tripodi et al., 2023). Both concerns are likely to be magnified in the future, increasing the risk of what we suggest calling evidence hacking —the strategic and coordinated malicious manipulation of society’s evidence base.

The authority of quality-controlled research as evidence to support legislation, policy, politics, and other forms of decision-making is undermined by the presence of undeclared GPT-fabricated content in publications professing to be scientific. Due to the large number of archives, repositories, mirror sites, and shadow libraries to which they spread, there is a clear risk that GPT-fabricated, questionable papers will reach audiences even after a possible retraction. There are considerable technical difficulties involved in identifying and tracing computer-fabricated papers (Cabanac & Labbé, 2021; Dadkhah et al., 2023; Jones, 2024), not to mention preventing and curbing their spread and uptake.

However, as the rise of the so-called anti-vaxx movement during the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing obstruction and denial of climate change show, retracting erroneous publications often fuels conspiracies and increases the following of these movements rather than stopping them. To illustrate this mechanism, climate deniers frequently question established scientific consensus by pointing to other, supposedly scientific, studies that support their claims. Usually, these are poorly executed, not peer-reviewed, based on obsolete data, or even fraudulent (Dunlap & Brulle, 2020). A similar strategy is successful in the alternative epistemic world of the global anti-vaccination movement (Carrion, 2018) and the persistence of flawed and questionable publications in the scientific record already poses significant problems for health research, policy, and lawmakers, and thus for society as a whole (Littell et al., 2024). Considering that a person’s support for “doing your own research” is associated with increased mistrust in scientific institutions (Chinn & Hasell, 2023), it will be of utmost importance to anticipate and consider such backfiring effects already when designing a technical solution, when suggesting industry or legal regulation, and in the planning of educational measures.

Recommendations

Solutions should be based on simultaneous considerations of technical, educational, and regulatory approaches, as well as incentives, including social ones, across the entire research infrastructure. Paying attention to how these approaches and incentives relate to each other can help identify points and mechanisms for disruption. Recognizing fraudulent academic papers must happen alongside understanding how they reach their audiences and what reasons there might be for some of these papers successfully “sticking around.” A possible way to mitigate some of the risks associated with GPT-fabricated scholarly texts finding their way into academic search engine results would be to provide filtering options for facets such as indexed journals, gray literature, peer-review, and similar on the interface of publicly available academic search engines. Furthermore, evaluation tools for indexed journals 3 Such as LiU Journal CheckUp, https://ep.liu.se/JournalCheckup/default.aspx?lang=eng . could be integrated into the graphical user interfaces and the crawlers of these academic search engines. To enable accountability, it is important that the index (database) of such a search engine is populated according to criteria that are transparent, open to scrutiny, and appropriate to the workings of science and other forms of academic research. Moreover, considering that Google Scholar has no real competitor, there is a strong case for establishing a freely accessible, non-specialized academic search engine that is not run for commercial reasons but for reasons of public interest. Such measures, together with educational initiatives aimed particularly at policymakers, science communicators, journalists, and other media workers, will be crucial to reducing the possibilities for and effects of malicious manipulation or evidence hacking. It is important not to present this as a technical problem that exists only because of AI text generators but to relate it to the wider concerns in which it is embedded. These range from a largely dysfunctional scholarly publishing system (Haider & Åström, 2017) and academia’s “publish or perish” paradigm to Google’s near-monopoly and ideological battles over the control of information and ultimately knowledge. Any intervention is likely to have systemic effects; these effects need to be considered and assessed in advance and, ideally, followed up on.

Our study focused on a selection of papers that were easily recognizable as fraudulent. We used this relatively small sample as a magnifying glass to examine, delineate, and understand a problem that goes beyond the scope of the sample itself, which however points towards larger concerns that require further investigation. The work of ongoing whistleblowing initiatives 4 Such as Academ-AI, https://www.academ-ai.info/ , and Retraction Watch, https://retractionwatch.com/papers-and-peer-reviews-with-evidence-of-chatgpt-writing/ . , recent media reports of journal closures (Subbaraman, 2024), or GPT-related changes in word use and writing style (Cabanac et al., 2021; Stokel-Walker, 2024) suggest that we only see the tip of the iceberg. There are already more sophisticated cases (Dadkhah et al., 2023) as well as cases involving fabricated images (Gu et al., 2022). Our analysis shows that questionable and potentially manipulative GPT-fabricated papers permeate the research infrastructure and are likely to become a widespread phenomenon. Our findings underline that the risk of fake scientific papers being used to maliciously manipulate evidence (see Dadkhah et al., 2017) must be taken seriously. Manipulation may involve undeclared automatic summaries of texts, inclusion in literature reviews, explicit scientific claims, or the concealment of errors in studies so that they are difficult to detect in peer review. However, the mere possibility of these things happening is a significant risk in its own right that can be strategically exploited and will have ramifications for trust in and perception of science. Society’s methods of evaluating sources and the foundations of media and information literacy are under threat and public trust in science is at risk of further erosion, with far-reaching consequences for society in dealing with information disorders. To address this multifaceted problem, we first need to understand why it exists and proliferates.

Finding 1: 139 GPT-fabricated, questionable papers were found and listed as regular results on the Google Scholar results page. Non-indexed journals dominate.

Most questionable papers we found were in non-indexed journals or were working papers, but we did also find some in established journals, publications, conferences, and repositories. We found a total of 139 papers with a suspected deceptive use of ChatGPT or similar LLM applications (see Table 1). Out of these, 19 were in indexed journals, 89 were in non-indexed journals, 19 were student papers found in university databases, and 12 were working papers (mostly in preprint databases). Table 1 divides these papers into categories. Health and environment papers made up around 34% (47) of the sample. Of these, 66% were present in non-indexed journals.


Indexed journals*	5	3	4	7	19
Non-indexed journals	18	18	13	40	89
Student papers	4	3	1	11	19
Working papers	5	3	2	2	12
Total	32	27	20	60	139

Finding 2: GPT-fabricated, questionable papers are disseminated online, permeating the research infrastructure for scholarly communication, often in multiple copies. Applied topics with practical implications dominate.

The 20 papers concerning health-related issues are distributed across 20 unique domains, accounting for 46 URLs. The 27 papers dealing with environmental issues can be found across 26 unique domains, accounting for 56 URLs. Most of the identified papers exist in multiple copies and have already spread to several archives, repositories, and social media. It would be difficult, or impossible, to remove them from the scientific record.

As apparent from Table 2, GPT-fabricated, questionable papers are seeping into most parts of the online research infrastructure for scholarly communication. Platforms on which identified papers have appeared include ResearchGate, ORCiD, Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology (JPTCP), Easychair, Frontiers, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineer (IEEE), and X/Twitter. Thus, even if they are retracted from their original source, it will prove very difficult to track, remove, or even just mark them up on other platforms. Moreover, unless regulated, Google Scholar will enable their continued and most likely unlabeled discoverability.


Environment	researchgate.net (13)	orcid.org (4)	easychair.org (3)	ijope.com* (3)	publikasiindonesia.id (3)
Health	researchgate.net (15)	ieee.org (4)	twitter.com (3)	jptcp.com** (2)	frontiersin.org (2)

A word rain visualization (Centre for Digital Humanities Uppsala, 2023), which combines word prominences through TF-IDF 5 Term frequency–inverse document frequency , a method for measuring the significance of a word in a document compared to its frequency across all documents in a collection. scores with semantic similarity of the full texts of our sample of GPT-generated articles that fall into the “Environment” and “Health” categories, reflects the two categories in question. However, as can be seen in Figure 1, it also reveals overlap and sub-areas. The y-axis shows word prominences through word positions and font sizes, while the x-axis indicates semantic similarity. In addition to a certain amount of overlap, this reveals sub-areas, which are best described as two distinct events within the word rain. The event on the left bundles terms related to the development and management of health and healthcare with “challenges,” “impact,” and “potential of artificial intelligence”emerging as semantically related terms. Terms related to research infrastructures, environmental, epistemic, and technological concepts are arranged further down in the same event (e.g., “system,” “climate,” “understanding,” “knowledge,” “learning,” “education,” “sustainable”). A second distinct event further to the right bundles terms associated with fish farming and aquatic medicinal plants, highlighting the presence of an aquaculture cluster. Here, the prominence of groups of terms such as “used,” “model,” “-based,” and “traditional” suggests the presence of applied research on these topics. The two events making up the word rain visualization, are linked by a less dominant but overlapping cluster of terms related to “energy” and “water.”

The bar chart of the terms in the paper subset (see Figure 2) complements the word rain visualization by depicting the most prominent terms in the full texts along the y-axis. Here, word prominences across health and environment papers are arranged descendingly, where values outside parentheses are TF-IDF values (relative frequencies) and values inside parentheses are raw term frequencies (absolute frequencies).

Finding 3: Google Scholar presents results from quality-controlled and non-controlled citation databases on the same interface, providing unfiltered access to GPT-fabricated questionable papers.

Google Scholar’s central position in the publicly accessible scholarly communication infrastructure, as well as its lack of standards, transparency, and accountability in terms of inclusion criteria, has potentially serious implications for public trust in science. This is likely to exacerbate the already-known potential to exploit Google Scholar for evidence hacking (Tripodi et al., 2023) and will have implications for any attempts to retract or remove fraudulent papers from their original publication venues. Any solution must consider the entirety of the research infrastructure for scholarly communication and the interplay of different actors, interests, and incentives.

We searched and scraped Google Scholar using the Python library Scholarly (Cholewiak et al., 2023) for papers that included specific phrases known to be common responses from ChatGPT and similar applications with the same underlying model (GPT3.5 or GPT4): “as of my last knowledge update” and/or “I don’t have access to real-time data” (see Appendix A). This facilitated the identification of papers that likely used generative AI to produce text, resulting in 227 retrieved papers. The papers’ bibliographic information was automatically added to a spreadsheet and downloaded into Zotero. 6 An open-source reference manager, https://zotero.org .

We employed multiple coding (Barbour, 2001) to classify the papers based on their content. First, we jointly assessed whether the paper was suspected of fraudulent use of ChatGPT (or similar) based on how the text was integrated into the papers and whether the paper was presented as original research output or the AI tool’s role was acknowledged. Second, in analyzing the content of the papers, we continued the multiple coding by classifying the fraudulent papers into four categories identified during an initial round of analysis—health, environment, computing, and others—and then determining which subjects were most affected by this issue (see Table 1). Out of the 227 retrieved papers, 88 papers were written with legitimate and/or declared use of GPTs (i.e., false positives, which were excluded from further analysis), and 139 papers were written with undeclared and/or fraudulent use (i.e., true positives, which were included in further analysis). The multiple coding was conducted jointly by all authors of the present article, who collaboratively coded and cross-checked each other’s interpretation of the data simultaneously in a shared spreadsheet file. This was done to single out coding discrepancies and settle coding disagreements, which in turn ensured methodological thoroughness and analytical consensus (see Barbour, 2001). Redoing the category coding later based on our established coding schedule, we achieved an intercoder reliability (Cohen’s kappa) of 0.806 after eradicating obvious differences.

The ranking algorithm of Google Scholar prioritizes highly cited and older publications (Martín-Martín et al., 2016). Therefore, the position of the articles on the search engine results pages was not particularly informative, considering the relatively small number of results in combination with the recency of the publications. Only the query “as of my last knowledge update” had more than two search engine result pages. On those, questionable articles with undeclared use of GPTs were evenly distributed across all result pages (min: 4, max: 9, mode: 8), with the proportion of undeclared use being slightly higher on average on later search result pages.

To understand how the papers making fraudulent use of generative AI were disseminated online, we programmatically searched for the paper titles (with exact string matching) in Google Search from our local IP address (see Appendix B) using the googlesearch – python library(Vikramaditya, 2020). We manually verified each search result to filter out false positives—results that were not related to the paper—and then compiled the most prominent URLs by field. This enabled the identification of other platforms through which the papers had been spread. We did not, however, investigate whether copies had spread into SciHub or other shadow libraries, or if they were referenced in Wikipedia.

We used descriptive statistics to count the prevalence of the number of GPT-fabricated papers across topics and venues and top domains by subject. The pandas software library for the Python programming language (The pandas development team, 2024) was used for this part of the analysis. Based on the multiple coding, paper occurrences were counted in relation to their categories, divided into indexed journals, non-indexed journals, student papers, and working papers. The schemes, subdomains, and subdirectories of the URL strings were filtered out while top-level domains and second-level domains were kept, which led to normalizing domain names. This, in turn, allowed the counting of domain frequencies in the environment and health categories. To distinguish word prominences and meanings in the environment and health-related GPT-fabricated questionable papers, a semantically-aware word cloud visualization was produced through the use of a word rain (Centre for Digital Humanities Uppsala, 2023) for full-text versions of the papers. Font size and y-axis positions indicate word prominences through TF-IDF scores for the environment and health papers (also visualized in a separate bar chart with raw term frequencies in parentheses), and words are positioned along the x-axis to reflect semantic similarity (Skeppstedt et al., 2024), with an English Word2vec skip gram model space (Fares et al., 2017). An English stop word list was used, along with a manually produced list including terms such as “https,” “volume,” or “years.”

Artificial Intelligence
/ Search engines

Cite this Essay

Haider, J., Söderström, K. R., Ekström, B., & Rödl, M. (2024). GPT-fabricated scientific papers on Google Scholar: Key features, spread, and implications for preempting evidence manipulation. Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review . https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-156

/ Appendix B

Bibliography

Antkare, I. (2020). Ike Antkare, his publications, and those of his disciples. In M. Biagioli & A. Lippman (Eds.), Gaming the metrics (pp. 177–200). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11087.003.0018

Barbour, R. S. (2001). Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: A case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ , 322 (7294), 1115–1117. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115

Bom, H.-S. H. (2023). Exploring the opportunities and challenges of ChatGPT in academic writing: A roundtable discussion. Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging , 57 (4), 165–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13139-023-00809-2

Cabanac, G., & Labbé, C. (2021). Prevalence of nonsensical algorithmically generated papers in the scientific literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology , 72 (12), 1461–1476. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24495

Cabanac, G., Labbé, C., & Magazinov, A. (2021). Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science. Evidence of critical issues affecting established journals . arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.06751

Carrion, M. L. (2018). “You need to do your research”: Vaccines, contestable science, and maternal epistemology. Public Understanding of Science , 27 (3), 310–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517728024

Centre for Digital Humanities Uppsala (2023). CDHUppsala/word-rain [Computer software]. https://github.com/CDHUppsala/word-rain

Chinn, S., & Hasell, A. (2023). Support for “doing your own research” is associated with COVID-19 misperceptions and scientific mistrust. Harvard Kennedy School (HSK) Misinformation Review, 4 (3). https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-117

Cholewiak, S. A., Ipeirotis, P., Silva, V., & Kannawadi, A. (2023). SCHOLARLY: Simple access to Google Scholar authors and citation using Python (1.5.0) [Computer software]. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5764801

Dadkhah, M., Lagzian, M., & Borchardt, G. (2017). Questionable papers in citation databases as an issue for literature review. Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling , 11 (2), 181–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12079-016-0370-6

Dadkhah, M., Oermann, M. H., Hegedüs, M., Raman, R., & Dávid, L. D. (2023). Detection of fake papers in the era of artificial intelligence. Diagnosis , 10 (4), 390–397. https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2023-0090

DeGeurin, M. (2024, March 19). AI-generated nonsense is leaking into scientific journals. Popular Science. https://www.popsci.com/technology/ai-generated-text-scientific-journals/

Dunlap, R. E., & Brulle, R. J. (2020). Sources and amplifiers of climate change denial. In D.C. Holmes & L. M. Richardson (Eds.), Research handbook on communicating climate change (pp. 49–61). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789900408.00013

Fares, M., Kutuzov, A., Oepen, S., & Velldal, E. (2017). Word vectors, reuse, and replicability: Towards a community repository of large-text resources. In J. Tiedemann & N. Tahmasebi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Nordic Conference on Computational Linguistics (pp. 271–276). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/W17-0237

Google Scholar Help. (n.d.). Inclusion guidelines for webmasters . https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/inclusion.html

Gu, J., Wang, X., Li, C., Zhao, J., Fu, W., Liang, G., & Qiu, J. (2022). AI-enabled image fraud in scientific publications. Patterns , 3 (7), 100511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2022.100511

Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods , 11 (2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378

Haider, J., & Åström, F. (2017). Dimensions of trust in scholarly communication: Problematizing peer review in the aftermath of John Bohannon’s “Sting” in science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology , 68 (2), 450–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23669

Huang, J., & Tan, M. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in scientific communication: Writing better scientific review articles. American Journal of Cancer Research , 13 (4), 1148–1154. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10164801/

Jones, N. (2024). How journals are fighting back against a wave of questionable images. Nature , 626 (8000), 697–698. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00372-6

Kitamura, F. C. (2023). ChatGPT is shaping the future of medical writing but still requires human judgment. Radiology , 307 (2), e230171. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.230171

Littell, J. H., Abel, K. M., Biggs, M. A., Blum, R. W., Foster, D. G., Haddad, L. B., Major, B., Munk-Olsen, T., Polis, C. B., Robinson, G. E., Rocca, C. H., Russo, N. F., Steinberg, J. R., Stewart, D. E., Stotland, N. L., Upadhyay, U. D., & Ditzhuijzen, J. van. (2024). Correcting the scientific record on abortion and mental health outcomes. BMJ , 384 , e076518. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2023-076518

Lund, B. D., Wang, T., Mannuru, N. R., Nie, B., Shimray, S., & Wang, Z. (2023). ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence-written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74 (5), 570–581. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24750

Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Ayllón, J. M., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2016). Back to the past: On the shoulders of an academic search engine giant. Scientometrics , 107 , 1477–1487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1917-2

Martín-Martín, A., Thelwall, M., Orduna-Malea, E., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2021). Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: A multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations. Scientometrics , 126 (1), 871–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03690-4

Simon, F. M., Altay, S., & Mercier, H. (2023). Misinformation reloaded? Fears about the impact of generative AI on misinformation are overblown. Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review, 4 (5). https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-127

Skeppstedt, M., Ahltorp, M., Kucher, K., & Lindström, M. (2024). From word clouds to Word Rain: Revisiting the classic word cloud to visualize climate change texts. Information Visualization , 23 (3), 217–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/14738716241236188

Swedish Research Council. (2017). Good research practice. Vetenskapsrådet.

Stokel-Walker, C. (2024, May 1.). AI Chatbots Have Thoroughly Infiltrated Scientific Publishing . Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/chatbots-have-thoroughly-infiltrated-scientific-publishing/

Subbaraman, N. (2024, May 14). Flood of fake science forces multiple journal closures: Wiley to shutter 19 more journals, some tainted by fraud. The Wall Street Journal . https://www.wsj.com/science/academic-studies-research-paper-mills-journals-publishing-f5a3d4bc

The pandas development team. (2024). pandas-dev/pandas: Pandas (v2.2.2) [Computer software]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10957263

Thorp, H. H. (2023). ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science , 379 (6630), 313–313. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg7879

Tripodi, F. B., Garcia, L. C., & Marwick, A. E. (2023). ‘Do your own research’: Affordance activation and disinformation spread. Information, Communication & Society , 27 (6), 1212–1228. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2023.2245869

Vikramaditya, N. (2020). Nv7-GitHub/googlesearch [Computer software]. https://github.com/Nv7-GitHub/googlesearch

This research has been supported by Mistra, the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research, through the research program Mistra Environmental Communication (Haider, Ekström, Rödl) and the Marcus and Amalia Wallenberg Foundation [2020.0004] (Söderström).

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

The research described in this article was carried out under Swedish legislation. According to the relevant EU and Swedish legislation (2003:460) on the ethical review of research involving humans (“Ethical Review Act”), the research reported on here is not subject to authorization by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (“etikprövningsmyndigheten”) (SRC, 2017).

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original author and source are properly credited.

Data Availability

All data needed to replicate this study are available at the Harvard Dataverse: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/WUVD8X

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on the article manuscript as well as the editorial group of Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review for their thoughtful feedback and input.

The Middle Eastʼs leading independent news source since 2012

Netanyahu calls uk decision to halt arms export licenses to israel 'shameful', after the announcement by the british government of suspending 30 arms export licenses to israel, prime minister benjamin netanyahu accuses london of bolstering hamas..

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu slammed Tuesday the decision by the British government the day before to suspend 30 arms licenses to Israel, arguing that London’s move will empower Hamas.

"This shameful decision will not change Israel's determination to defeat Hamas," said Netanyahu on the X platform, noting that Hamas killed 14 British citizens Oct. 7 and that five UK citizens are among the hostages held by the group in the Gaza Strip.

"Instead of standing with Israel, a fellow democracy defending itself against barbarism, Britain’s misguided decision will only embolden Hamas," the Israeli premier wrote. "Just as Britain’s heroic stand against the Nazis is seen today as having been vital in defending our common civilization, so too will history judge Israel’s stand against Hamas and Iran’s axis of terror. With or without British arms, Israel will win this war and secure our common future."

British Foreign Secretary David Lammy explained Monday that the suspension of 30 arms export licenses was decided after an overall review of all 345 arms export licenses to Israel granted or extended since Oct. 7. It was the previous UK government that ordered the review over concerns that British weapons would be used to violate international law in the war in Gaza. Lammy stressed that the decision does not mean a full arms embargo against the Jewish state.

The suspended items include components that go into military aircraft — including fighter jets, helicopters and drones, as well as items that facilitate ground targeting — that would be used in the Gaza Strip.

British components for the multinational F-35 joint strike fighter program were excluded from the suspensions, except when going directly to Israel. The ministry said that a decision on the F-35 fleet would have "serious implications for international peace and security."

Shortly after Lammy's announcement, Israel’s Foreign Minister Israel Katz said, "Israel is disappointed by the British government’s recent series of decisions, including the latest decision regarding security exports to Israel, the British Government’s decision to withdraw its request to submit an amicus brief to the ICC, and its stance on UNRWA, as well as the UK’s recent conduct and statements in the UN Security Council."

On Tuesday, former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson accused British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Lammy of abandoning Israel. "Hamas is still holding many innocent Jewish hostages while Israel tries to prevent a repeat of the 7th October massacre. Why are Lammy and Starmer abandoning Israel? Do they want Hamas to win?" Johnson wrote on X.

Britain's Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis also criticized the British government's decision. In a statement on X on Monday night, Mirvis said that it “beggars belief” that such a decision was made “at a time when Israel is fighting a war for its very survival on seven fronts forced upon it on the 7th October, and at the very moment when six hostages murdered in cold blood by cruel terrorists were being buried by their families.”

The chief rabbi argued that the decision would do nothing to secure the release of the remaining 101 hostages in Gaza.

Yet despite all the outcry, British arms make up a small fraction of Israeli military imports . In 2022, former British Business Minister Greg Hands said that the United Kingdom accounted for only around 0.02% of Israel's arms imports. However, between May 2015 and August 2022, the UK government licensed over 448 million euros ($589 million) worth of arms to Israel, including for aircraft, missiles and other lethal military technology.

UK halts 30 arms export licenses to Israel, citing Gaza concerns

Foreign Secretary David Lammy announced the partial suspension in parliament

UK walks tightrope with hardened stance on Israel

REDDITCH, UNITED KINGDOM - JULY 03: Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer delivers a speech to supporters during a visit to a community centre on July 03, 2024 in Redditch, United Kingdom. Keir Starmer visited three countries of the UK on the final day of election campaigning. (Photo by Christopher Furlong/Getty Images)

As UK swings left with Labour landslide, what awaits Middle East policy?

Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer delivers a speech during a visit to Hutchinson Engineering in Widnes, north of England, on July 25, 2024.

UK’s new government reboots trade talks with Gulf, Israel, Turkey

Queensland gambling regulator under fire over last week's decision to grant new Brisbane casino licence

By Matt Eaton

Topic: Gambling

A picture of a large new casino building

Queensland's gambling regulator is facing questions over its licence approval for the new Star Brisbane casino. ( ABC News: Matt Eaton )

Queensland's gambling regulator the Office of Liquor and Gaming Revenue is facing renewed scrutiny.

The ABC has been told OLGR learnt Star Entertainment was again deemed unsuitable to run a NSW casino the day after it granted The Star Brisbane's casino licence.

What’s next?

The state opposition says it is time for Queensland to consider an independent casino regulating authority, but stopped short of committing a future LNP government to the move.

Queensland's gambling regulator is facing questions over its licence approval for the new Star Brisbane casino two days before Star Entertainment Group was again ruled unsuitable to run a casino in New South Wales.

The ABC learned last night the Queensland Office of Liquor and Gaming Regulation (OLGR) received the second Bell report last Thursday — the same day The Star Brisbane opened its doors and a day before the report was released publicly by the NSW Independent Casino Commission (NICC).

The second Bell report declared that Star remained unsuitable as a NSW casino operator .

The OLGR had waited until Wednesday — the day before The Star Brisbane's opening — to approve a casino licence to the consortium that owns the Queen's Wharf development.

But the NICC had received the Bell report a month before its public release. Queensland Shadow Attorney-General Tim Nicholls said yesterday he thought it highly likely someone at the OLGR knew of the Bell report's findings ahead of the licensing decision.

In a statement, Queensland Attorney-General Yvette D'Ath said last night the OLGR had been working closely with the NICC to oversee The Star’s remediation progress and had been monitoring the 2024 inquiry into The Star.

Yvette D'Ath says the Destination Brisbane Consortium satisfied licensing conditions. ( AAP: Jono Searle )

"We note the Bell Two report’s findings that The Star remains unsuitable to hold a casino licence in New South Wales," Ms D'Ath said.

"We also acknowledge that NICC has not yet announced its response to the Bell Two report, and we’ll continue to monitor the situation and work through any implications for The Star’s Queensland operations."

Star seeking extra money and tax breaks

Cash-strapped Star remains in an ASX-imposed trading halt after failing to reveal its financial position to the market as required last Friday.

Star has until December to prove its suitability as a casino licensee following major failings in controlling money laundering at its Brisbane and Gold Coast casinos, first revealed in 2022 .

In the past year, the company has twice sought funds from shareholders and has tapped its biggest investors for extra cash.

It faces an as-yet-undisclosed fine by federal financial regulator AUSTRAC that could stretch into the hundreds of millions.

The ABC understands Star has also sought payroll tax deferrals from the Queensland government.

Premier Steven Miles said today discussions are continuing with Star after it requested help and confirmed the current talks relate to "obvious moving parts", such as gambling and payroll tax deferrals.

He said it is "not unusual for the state to enter into those kind of arrangements".

"There are other examples where projects with large capital costs but big jobs dividends have been able to defer their payments to the state, provided that ultimately they get paid in the long run," he said.

Premier Steven Miles speaking to the media

Steven Miles says the government does not want Queen's Wharf to fail. ( ABC News )

"There are certainly no discussions that I'm aware of at this stage that involve the waiving of payments. There has been some requests around deferral of payments."

Mr Miles described the NSW government's reluctance to offer any tax relief to Star as "pretty disappointing".

"This is an important employer in Sydney as well — if I was the NSW government, I'd want to keep those people in jobs."

Asked whether the Queensland government regarded Star as too big to fail, he replied: "Certainly the state has an interest in Queen's Wharf Brisbane in not failing and that's what we're endeavouring to achieve."

Mr Nicholls said it was clear Star "has a multitude of problems" and "the market might determine whether Star survives or not in its current form".

He believed the OLGR faced "a lot of pressure" to ensure the doors of a new casino could open last Thursday.

Tim Nicholls says the OLGR needs to be more transparent in its decision-making. ( ABC News: Dean Caton )

"I think people want to know on what basis has the attorney-general decided that Star and its partners are a fit and proper person to hold this licence?" he said.

Stockbroker Charlie Green said the suspension from the ASX was "very concerning" for shareholders who have not seen the accounts.

He said the investment industry had heard that Star needed an injection of at least $300 million to stop it "unravelling".

"You usually associate a trading halt with some washed out, you know, miner from the back of Burke. You don't usually associate a trading halt with a company that was a top 100 company and is now fading fast," he said.

"Is it too much of a cliche to say Star is at risk of becoming a black hole? Is that a shocker? Because that's where we're headed. If it goes into administration it is all over for the equity holders."

Stockbroker Charlie Green says the suspension from the ASX was “very concerning”. ( ABC News: Lexy Hamilton-Smith )

State regulators have 'failed'

Mr Nicholls said it could be time for Queensland to follow the lead of NSW and set up its own independent casino regulator, but stopped short of committing a future LNP government to the move.

"I've raised this in the past," he said.

Aerial shot of the riverside Queens Wharf development

Cash-strapped Star remains in an ASX-imposed trading halt. ( Supplied: Star Entertainment Group )

"The Office of Liquor and Gaming Regulation [is] part of the Department of Justice and Attorney-General. I think there is a strong case to be made for the regulatory authority to be sort of separate, if you like, from executive government," he said.

Mr Nicholls said an LNP government would "see what information we have and make that information available so the public can actually see what is going on and what has been going on behind closed doors".

He said his first move would be to get fully briefed on what the OLGR knew and when.

"Because we're flying in the dark, much like most of the public in Queensland is at the moment."

Tim Costello says it's "inconceivable" that OLGR was not briefed on the Bell report last week. ( Supplied )

Alliance for Gambling Reform chief advocate Tim Costello said it was time for a national casino regulator.

"Look, the truth is that state-based regulators have failed," he said.

"I mean, how many chances does Star get? We need a national regulator that actually is empowered to make tough decisions."

He said it was "inconceivable" that the OLGR was unaware of the Bell report findings when granting the new Star Brisbane casino licence.

Mr Costello said he was "very suspicious" of the OLGR's move to hand the new Brisbane casino licence to the consortium that owns Queen's Wharf rather than directly to Star.

"They actually knew, it seems to me, that Star wasn't fit and yet they said, 'Oh, we found a loophole.'

"We don't want anything setting back the opening date of this shiny, brand new casino that everyone's, you know, cheering about, that's too big to fail."

Mr Nicholls agreed granting licence to the consortium rather than Star was "slightly odd".

Ms D'Ath said Governor in Council granted approval for a casino licence to be issued to Destination Brisbane Consortium in October 2016, subject to a number of conditions.

"The licence became unconditional after Destination Brisbane Consortium satisfied these conditions, which included entering a long-term lease with the state which took effect on August 29, 2024," Ms D'Ath said.

The Star Brisbane CEO Daniel Finch was unavailable for comment yesterday.

Home / Essay Samples / Business / Management / Decision Making

Decision Making Essay Examples

The decision to take a stand.

In life, there are moments when remaining silent is not an option. Taking a stand is a powerful and courageous act that can shape history, inspire change, and uphold values. However, the decision to take a stand is not always easy and depends on various...

Making Informed Choices: the Importance of Decision Making

I am going to reveal an important topic within the importance of decision making essay. So why decision making is Important in one's life? We make decisions according to our desires, our preferences and usually what we are comfortable with. A lot of our decisions...

The Importance of Decision Making in Personal Life and Work

Decision making is a fundamental aspect of our lives, influencing the paths we take, the opportunities we seize, and the outcomes we achieve. Whether in personal matters or professional contexts, the choices we make have far-reaching consequences. This essay explores the significance of decision making,...

Group Faith Integration in Business

Matto and Sippola (2016), define cost management as the “application of MA (managerial accounting) concepts, methods of data collection, and presentation in order to provide the information needed to plan, monitor and control costs”. Business owners and management face decision making on a continual basis...

The Impact of Sleep on Decision Making Skills Performance in Students

The change in decision making skills performance due to different controlled conditions in both participants are observed using qualitative research method. An interview session has been held with the both participant that comprises of 2 steps. For step 1, observing how participant answering a set...

An Irrational Investment Decision Making

Investments are funds commitments to one or more assets to be held for a period in the future, with an expectations that these assets will result in higher revenue. For investments involving financial assets such as stocks, there are many factors that need to be...

Key Points in Blink: the Power of Thinking Without Thinking

Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking by Malcom Gladwell is an exploratory work that examines the human mind’s intuitive decision-making abilities. Gladwell’s work provides several accounts and examples that support his argument that judgements or decisions made in a split-second (snap judgements) with very...

Ethics in Everyday Life: Right and Wrong Choices

Ethics are comprised of the principled code, or theory, that controls an individual's decisions and practices. Simply put ethics are socially constructed definitions of what is right and wrong. Ethics is worried about rights, duties, utilization of dialect, living a moral life and how individuals...

The Decision Making Process Techniques of Students

A standout amongst the most imperative contemplations for showcasing specialists is to investigate the client's basic decision-making process. Given the significance of students as clients in higher education, it seems important to check this technique. Amid this paper, we tend to check on thinks about...

The Social Aspect of the Moral Decision Making

According to Goodall (2014), even though are expected to drastically reduce traffic accidents, it is unavoidable that there will occur some. In some of these cases, cars will have to choose between harming one party or the other. In the last few years, it often...

Trying to find an excellent essay sample but no results?

Don’t waste your time and get a professional writer to help!