もし、私が受け取ったジャーナルレビューのひとつがAIによって作成されたものだと疑ったら、どうすればいいのでしょうか?

AI-Generated Reviews: Should Academics Raise Concerns?

As the world becomes more technologically advanced, artificial intelligence (AI) is finding its way into various aspects of our lives. From self-driving cars to virtual assistants, AI is revolutionizing industries and changing the way we live. However, there are certain areas where the use of AI raises ethical questions, and one such area is academic publishing.

In a recent post on Academia Stack Exchange, a user shared their suspicions about receiving an AI-generated review for their submitted paper. The user had received two reviews for their paper, one of which was deemed helpful and on-topic. However, the second review raised concerns as it appeared to be generated by an AI based solely on the abstract. The user was unsure whether they should bring their suspicions to the attention of the journal editor.

This situation raises important questions about the integrity of the peer review process and the use of AI in academic publishing. While AI has the potential to streamline the review process and provide valuable insights, its use in generating reviews without human involvement poses several ethical concerns.

One of the main concerns is the protection of intellectual property. When an AI reviews a paper, it involves inserting the work into a third-party tool, which may incorporate it into its training data. This breach of confidentiality goes against the principles of peer review, where reviewers are sworn to maintain the confidentiality of the papers they review.

Additionally, the use of AI in peer review raises questions about the reliability and quality of the reviews. AI may not possess the same level of expertise and critical thinking abilities as human reviewers, potentially leading to biased or inaccurate assessments of the papers. This can undermine the credibility of the peer review process and compromise the quality of published research.

Furthermore, the lack of constructive feedback in AI-generated reviews is a significant concern. Constructive feedback is essential for authors to improve their work and address any shortcomings. If AI-generated reviews provide only general positive feedback without offering substantial insights or suggestions for improvement, it hinders the growth and development of researchers.

Given these concerns, it is crucial for academics to raise their suspicions about AI-generated reviews to journal editors. By doing so, they can bring awareness to the potential issues and prompt discussions about the use of AI in academic publishing.

When contacting the editor, it is important to provide a detailed explanation of why the review is suspected to be AI-generated. This should include the limitations of each point of evidence and any concerns about the integrity of the peer review process. Referring to the journal’s explicit statement on the use of AI in peer review, if available, can strengthen the argument.

It is essential to emphasize that raising suspicions about AI-generated reviews does not imply protesting the decision for a revision. Authors should express gratitude for the helpful feedback from legitimate reviewers while politely pointing out the absence of actionable feedback from the suspected AI-generated review. This approach can prompt the editor to consider the nature of the review and take appropriate actions.

Ultimately, the decision of how to proceed rests with the journal editor. They may choose to bring in another reviewer or investigate the suspicions further. Authors should assess the editor’s response and effort in addressing the concerns and consider whether it affects their opinion of the journal as a suitable place to submit their work.

In conclusion, the use of AI-generated reviews in academic publishing raises ethical concerns about the integrity of the peer review process and the protection of intellectual property. Academics should not hesitate to raise suspicions about AI-generated reviews to journal editors, as it is crucial to maintain the quality and credibility of published research. By initiating discussions and promoting transparency, academics can contribute to shaping the future of peer review in the era of AI.

Tags: AI-generated reviews, academic publishing, peer review, ethics, intellectual property

注意

コメントする