Editors' statement on the responsible use of generative AI technologies in scholarly journal publishing.
Bioethics
Chatbots
Generative AI
Journal
Medicine, health care, and philosophy
ISSN: 1572-8633
Titre abrégé: Med Health Care Philos
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9815900
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Oct 2023
20 Oct 2023
Historique:
pubmed:
21
10
2023
medline:
21
10
2023
entrez:
20
10
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37863860
doi: 10.1007/s11019-023-10176-6
pii: 10.1007/s11019-023-10176-6
doi:
Types de publication
Editorial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Gordijn, B., and H. Ten Have. 2023. ChatGPT: Evolution or revolution? Medicine, Health Care, and Philosophy 26 (1): 1–2.
doi: 10.1007/s11019-023-10136-0
Hosseini, M., L.M. Rasmussen, and D.B. Resnik. 2023a. Using AI to write scholarly publications. Accountability in Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2168535 .
doi: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2168535
Hosseini, M., D.B. Resnik, and K. Holmes. 2023b. The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence tools in writing scholarly manuscripts. Research Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231180449 .
doi: 10.1177/17470161231180449
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, “Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals,” updated May 2023, at https://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf .
Liebrenz, M., R. Schleifer, A. Buadze, et al. 2023. Generating scholarly content with ChatGPT: Ethical challenges for medical publishing. Lancet Digital Health 5 (3): E105–E106.
doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(23)00019-5
Lund, B.D., T. Wang, N.R. Mannuru, et al. 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.
doi: 10.1002/asi.24750
National Institutes of Health. 2023. The Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Technologies Is Prohibited for the NIH Peer Review Process. Available: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-23-149.html (Accessed September 1, 2023)
Teixeira, J.A., and P. Tsigaris. 2023. Human and AI-Based authorship: Principles and ethics. Learned Publishing 36 (3): 453–462.
doi: 10.1002/leap.1547
Thorpe, H.H. 2023. ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science 379 (6630): 313.
doi: 10.1126/science.adg7879
Zielinski C., M. A. Winker, R. Aggarwal, et al. Chatbots, Generative AI, and Scholarly Manuscripts. WAME Recommendations on Chatbots and Generative Artificial Intelligence in Relation to Scholarly Publications. Available: https://wame.org/page3.php?id=106 (Accessed September 1, 2023)