Editors' Statement on the Responsible Use of Generative AI Technologies in Scholarly Journal Publishing.
ChatGPT
accountability
bioethics
community of scholars
generative AI
humanities
journal publishing
large language models
transparency
Journal
The Hastings Center report
ISSN: 1552-146X
Titre abrégé: Hastings Cent Rep
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0410447
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2023
Sep 2023
Historique:
medline:
15
11
2023
pubmed:
1
10
2023
entrez:
1
10
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to transform many aspects of scholarly publishing. Authors, peer reviewers, and editors might use AI in a variety of ways, and those uses might augment their existing work or might instead be intended to replace it. We are editors of bioethics and humanities journals who have been contemplating the implications of this ongoing transformation. We believe that generative AI may pose a threat to the goals that animate our work but could also be valuable for achieving those goals. In the interests of fostering a wider conversation about how generative AI may be used, we have developed a preliminary set of recommendations for its use in scholarly publishing. We hope that the recommendations and rationales set out here will help the scholarly community navigate toward a deeper understanding of the strengths, limits, and challenges of AI for responsible scholarly work.
Types de publication
Editorial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3-6Subventions
Organisme : Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH)
Organisme : National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)
ID : UL1TR001422
Organisme : National Science Foundation (NSF)
ID : #2043612
Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Hastings Center.
Références
M. Hosseini, D. B. Resnik, and K. Holmes, “The Ethics of Disclosing the Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools in Writing Scholarly Manuscripts,” Research Ethics (June 15, 2023): doi:10.1177/17470161231180449;.
B. D. Lund et al., “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 (2023): doi:10.1002/asi.24750;
M. Liebrenz et al., “Generating Scholarly Content with ChatGPT: Ethical Challenges for Medical Publishing,” Lancet Digital Health 5 (2023): doi:10.1016/S2589-7500(23)00019-5;
J. A. Teixeira and P. Tsigaris, “Human and AI-Based Authorship: Principles and Ethics,” Learned Publishing 36 (2023): 453-62; M. Hosseini, L. M. Rasmussen, and D. Resnik, “Using AI to Write Scholarly Publications,” Accountability in Research (January 11, 2023): doi:10.1080/08989621.2023.2168535; International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, “Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals,” updated May 2023, https://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf.
Hosseini, Resnik, and Holmes, “The Ethics of Disclosing the Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools in Writing Scholarly Manuscripts.”
Lund et al., “ChatGPT and a New Academic Reality”; Teixeira and Tsigaris, “Human and AI-Based Authorship”; , B. Gordijn and H. ten Have, “ChatGPT: Evolution or Revolution?,” Medicine, Health Care, and Philosophy 26, no. 1 (2023): doi:10.1007/s11019-023-10136-0.
See also “The Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Technologies Is Prohibited for the NIH Peer Review Process,” National Institutes of Health, June 23, 2023, https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-23-149.html.
“Chatbots, Generative AI, and Scholarly Manuscripts,” World Association of Medical Editors, revised May 31, 2023, https://wame.org/page3.php?id=106.
H. H. Thorpe, “ChatGPT Is Fun, But Not an Author,” Science 379 (2023): 313.