Scholarlink

<p>In recent years, generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT) has significantly transformed the scientific domain. This shift has raised concerns about how scientific journals should adapt to these new technologies and the ethical implications they pose for the scientific craft. This study addresses these concerns by examining how top-ranked journals across eight disciplines (communication, economics, education, ethics, healthcare, linguistics, sociology, and political science) are adapting their author guidelines in response to the use of artificial intelligence in research. The content analysis reveals that 73.8% of journals mention the use of AI for drafting sections of articles, while references to its use in literature reviews are notably absent. Additionally, 61.3% of the journals mandate transparency regarding AI usage in research, but only 12% address privacy and data protection issues. There are notable differences across disciplines in their acceptance and regulation of AI: communication and sociology show greater openness to AI use, while economics remains more conservative. These findings suggest a growing acceptance of AI in certain stages of the research process, while also highlighting significant caution in its application to critical areas such as literature reviews.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in research: a review of author guidelines in leading journals across eight social science disciplines

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月11日

查看全文
  • Manuel Goyanes,
  • Carlos Lopezosa,
  • Valeriano Piñeiro-Naval

摘要

In recent years, generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT) has significantly transformed the scientific domain. This shift has raised concerns about how scientific journals should adapt to these new technologies and the ethical implications they pose for the scientific craft. This study addresses these concerns by examining how top-ranked journals across eight disciplines (communication, economics, education, ethics, healthcare, linguistics, sociology, and political science) are adapting their author guidelines in response to the use of artificial intelligence in research. The content analysis reveals that 73.8% of journals mention the use of AI for drafting sections of articles, while references to its use in literature reviews are notably absent. Additionally, 61.3% of the journals mandate transparency regarding AI usage in research, but only 12% address privacy and data protection issues. There are notable differences across disciplines in their acceptance and regulation of AI: communication and sociology show greater openness to AI use, while economics remains more conservative. These findings suggest a growing acceptance of AI in certain stages of the research process, while also highlighting significant caution in its application to critical areas such as literature reviews.