How Are AI Detector Inaccuracies Impacting Writers Who Get Flagged For Original Content?

Ailsa Ostovitz, a 17 year old student at Eleanor Roosevelt High School near Washington, D.C., faced accusations of AI use on three school assignments. She told NPR the claims felt draining because the work came from her own thoughts and writing habits.

One teacher shared a screenshot from an AI detection tool that showed a 30.76% likelihood of AI use on an essay about music. Ostovitz told NPR she writes about music often and questioned why software judged that work as artificial.

After she messaged her teacher through the school system, she received no reply and her grade went down. Her mother, Stephanie Rizk, said the decision came early in the school year, before the teacher had a clear view of her daughter’s writing level.

How Common Are These Tools In Classrooms?

Use of AI detectors has grown quickly. A national poll by the Center for Democracy and Technology found more than 40% of teachers in grades six to twelve used these tools during the last school year.

Prince George’s County Public Schools said teachers receive advice not to rely on such software. The district told NPR that many sources have documented inaccuracies and uneven results.

Mike Perkins, a researcher on academic integrity at British University Vietnam, told NPR these tools are not fit for purpose. He found popular systems flagged human writing as AI and missed AI text as well.

Perkins said results worsened once text was lightly edited to sound more human, adding to confusion for students who write in clear or repetitive styles.

Why Do False Flags Change How Writers Work?

School systems continue to spend large sums. Broward County Public Schools in Florida is paying more than $550,000 for a three year Turnitin contract, according to NPR.

Turnitin’s tool produces a percentage score. The company says results at 20% or lower carry less weight and warns against using scores alone for punishment.

Teachers such as John Grady at Shaker Heights High School told NPR the software acts as a conversation starter. His district pays about $5,600 each year for GPTZero licences.

Grady said about 75% of students whose work shows clear AI use admit it when asked. He checks editing history and writing time before any decision.

Students like Zi Shi, whose first language is Mandarin, worry about bias. He told NPR limited vocabulary and Grammarly use may trigger flags, even when the writing is original.

Back in Maryland, Ostovitz now runs assignments through multiple detectors. She rewrites flagged lines, adding around half an hour per task. She told NPR this extra labour feels necessary to protect work she already knows is her own.

Experts Share: How Are AI Detector Inaccuracies Impacting Writers Who Get Flagged For Original Content?

Here’s what the experts think about how AI detector inaccuracies are impacting writers getting flagged for original content.

 Our Experts:

• Ivan Vislavskiy, CEO and Co-founder, Comrade Digital Marketing Agency
• Sasha Berson, Co-Founder and Chief Growth Officer, Grow Law
• Karina Tymchenko, Founder, Brandualist
• Georgia Hodkinson MSc, GMBPsS, Organisational Psychologist and Director, Georgia’s PsyWork Ltd.
• Deb Andrews, Founder and President, Marketri

Ivan Vislavskiy, CEO and Co-founder, Comrade Digital Marketing Agency

“Honestly, I’ve worked with a roofing company owner who actually writes his own blogs. The guy knows roofing inside and out, been doing it for about 15 years, and he’s just trying to build trust by sharing real, useful advice. Then he runs his post through an AI detector and it says something like 87 percent AI-written. It’s literally his own words. That kind of thing messes with your head and makes you second-guess a perfectly good voice, or worse, rewrite solid content just to satisfy a broken tool.

“The thing is, what really matters is how Google views that content and how the audience responds to it. I’ve seen content that’s been flagged still bring in leads because it’s helpful and specific. At my agency, we focus on visibility. So, if AI systems like ChatGPT start recommending your content over your competitors’, you’re winning. Who cares if a detector thinks your blog’s too polished?”

Sasha Berson, Co-Founder and Chief Growth Officer, Grow Law

“I’ve had really solid writers, actually writing their own stuff, get flagged by AI detectors as if they just copied it from ChatGPT. Let me just give you one example, we had a legal client with a really strong in-house writer. Wrote an article from scratch, backed it with research and drafts.

“And just to double-check, we ran it through one of those AI detectors, and it came back saying 92% AI-generated. Didn’t matter how much real work went into it, the software ignored all that. The firm almost scrapped it, not because it wasn’t good, but because they were worried it might hurt their reputation with Google.

“The problem is, these tools don’t know how to recognise real writing. If your content is clear and well-organised, it gets flagged. That’s why I tell people now: keep documentation, treat detectors as just one data point, and don’t overreact to the score. Because once something is labeled wrong, fixing that trust problem is really tough.”

Karina Tymchenko, Founder, Brandualist

“The inaccuracy of AI detection tools is causing serious harm to many original writers. I have personally witnessed talented writers (questioned, delayed, rejected) because of an algorithmic tool that flagged their written content. Although these algorithms operate based upon “probability,” rather than fact, they are often presented as the definitive ruling. Anxiety, distrust, and additional roadblocks are being created in what was once meant to be productive, creative processes.

“Writers are being penalized for having “too polished” or “structured” writing, as if the ability to write clearly, coherently and grammatically, were somehow an insult to originality. Brands and publishers would do well to continue utilizing editorial reviews, along with writers’ histories, until detection technology has evolved enough to provide reliable information.”

Georgia Hodkinson MSc, GMBPsS, Organisational Psychologist and Director, Georgia’s PsyWork Ltd.

“AI detector inaccuracies are having a very real psychological and professional impact on writers, particularly those working in education, journalism, and knowledge-based roles.

“From a work psychology perspective, being incorrectly flagged for AI use can trigger threat responses similar to being accused of misconduct: anxiety, rumination, reduced confidence, and a reluctance to submit work or take creative risks. Over time, this can undermine psychological safety and intrinsic motivation, both of which are critical for high-quality writing.

There’s also a behavioural impact. Writers are increasingly editing their natural voice to “sound less AI”, over-explaining ideas, or deliberately writing less efficiently to avoid false positives. Ironically, this can reduce clarity and originality, the opposite of what these tools claim to protect.

“At an organisational level, over-reliance on imperfect AI detectors risks eroding trust between writers and institutions. When tools are treated as objective truth rather than probabilistic indicators, people feel monitored rather than supported. In the long run, this damages performance, wellbeing, and the quality of output.

“The more constructive approach is to treat AI detection as contextual input, not evidence. Clear policies, human review, and psychological safety are essential if organisations want to protect originality without penalising it.”

Deb Andrews, Founder and President, Marketri

“I’ve personally had original work flagged as AI-generated, despite the fact that it was written entirely from my own experience and perspective. AI detectors aren’t evaluating intent, original thought, expertise, etc. They’re pattern-matching, and when your writing is clear, structured, and informed by years of practice, it can look too polished to an algorithm.

“When that happens, writers are put in a defensive position. We now have to justify authorship instead of focusing on the substance of the ideas. That friction slows everything down and undermines trust, especially in professional and other settings where credibility matters.

“There’s also a chilling effect. Writers might feel the need to question their own voices and try to flatten their writing, avoid color or use any nuance, etc. so they can avoid being flagged. However, the penalty is on the experienced professional who will have consistency, depth, and not an automated response to their writing. When we resort to relying on less than perfect detection tools to determine authenticity, we have moved away from assessing the content to enforcing a particular style of writing.”