Humanising Peer Review with Artificial Intelligence: Paradox or Panacea?

IF 2 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice Pub Date : 2024-03-12 DOI:10.53761/xeqvhc70

Joseph Crawford, Kelly-Ann Allen, Jason Lodge

{"title":"Humanising Peer Review with Artificial Intelligence: Paradox or Panacea?","authors":"Joseph Crawford, Kelly-Ann Allen, Jason Lodge","doi":"10.53761/xeqvhc70","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The emergence of artificial intelligence in the higher education publishing context has led to scholars seeking opportunities to leverage the new technological affordances offered by the tool. Yet, there have been questions emerging about the extent to which artificial intelligence should prompt scholars towards certain outcomes. In this commentary, we examine the need for human flourishing to sit at the forefront of decisions around academic publishing alongside the pursuit of fair and innovative knowledge creation and dissemination. We advocate an evidence-based position against artificial intelligence as a peer reviewer, recognising that parroting knowledge is insufficient to be critical and comprehensive in the review process. There are significant limitations to the current artificial intelligence tools from bias to current corpus limitations that restrict its usefulness as a gatekeeper of knowledge, a key role a reviewer takes on board. We offer suggestions for places where artificial intelligence tools may be quite useful and offer some future directions for artificial intelligence in publishing processes.","PeriodicalId":45764,"journal":{"name":"Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53761/xeqvhc70","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The emergence of artificial intelligence in the higher education publishing context has led to scholars seeking opportunities to leverage the new technological affordances offered by the tool. Yet, there have been questions emerging about the extent to which artificial intelligence should prompt scholars towards certain outcomes. In this commentary, we examine the need for human flourishing to sit at the forefront of decisions around academic publishing alongside the pursuit of fair and innovative knowledge creation and dissemination. We advocate an evidence-based position against artificial intelligence as a peer reviewer, recognising that parroting knowledge is insufficient to be critical and comprehensive in the review process. There are significant limitations to the current artificial intelligence tools from bias to current corpus limitations that restrict its usefulness as a gatekeeper of knowledge, a key role a reviewer takes on board. We offer suggestions for places where artificial intelligence tools may be quite useful and offer some future directions for artificial intelligence in publishing processes.

查看原文本刊更多论文

用人工智能实现同行评审的人性化：悖论还是灵丹妙药？

人工智能在高等教育出版领域的出现，使学者们开始寻找机会利用这一工具提供的新技术能力。然而，对于人工智能应在多大程度上促使学者取得某些成果，也出现了一些问题。在这篇评论中，我们探讨了在学术出版决策中，除了追求公平和创新的知识创造与传播之外，人类的繁衍生息也应处于最重要的位置。我们提倡以证据为基础的立场，反对人工智能作为同行评审者，因为我们认识到，在评审过程中，鹦鹉学舌不足以成为批判性和全面性的评审者。目前的人工智能工具有很大的局限性，从偏见到目前的语料库限制，都限制了其作为知识守门人的作用，而这正是审稿人所承担的关键角色。我们就人工智能工具可能相当有用的地方提出了建议，并为出版流程中的人工智能提供了一些未来发展方向。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

3.60

自引率

18.80%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice aims to add significantly to the body of knowledge describing effective and innovative teaching and learning practice in higher education.The Journal is a forum for educational practitioners across a wide range of disciplines. Its purpose is to facilitate the communication of teaching and learning outcomes in a scholarly way, bridging the gap between journals covering purely academic research and articles and opinions published without peer review.