Where Will AI Take Scholarly Communication? Voices From the Research Frontline

IF 2.2 3区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
David Nicholas, Blanca Rodríguez-Bravo, Abdullah Abrizah, Jorge Revez, Eti Herman, David Clark, Marzena Swigon, Jie Xu, Anthony Watkinson
{"title":"Where Will AI Take Scholarly Communication? Voices From the Research Frontline","authors":"David Nicholas,&nbsp;Blanca Rodríguez-Bravo,&nbsp;Abdullah Abrizah,&nbsp;Jorge Revez,&nbsp;Eti Herman,&nbsp;David Clark,&nbsp;Marzena Swigon,&nbsp;Jie Xu,&nbsp;Anthony Watkinson","doi":"10.1002/leap.2008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Early career researchers (ECRs) are in an ideal position to soothsay. Yet, much of what we know about the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) comes from vested interest groups, such as publishers, tech companies and industry leaders, which are strong on hyperbole, are superficial and, at best, narrow surveys. This paper seeks to redress this by providing deep empirical data from researchers, allowing us to hear researchers' views and ‘voices’. The data comes from a project, which focuses on the impact of AI on scholarly communications. From this study, we report on the perceived transformations to the scholarly communications system by AI and other forces. We were especially interested in discovering what future ECRs foresaw for the established pillars of the system—journals and libraries. The interview-based study covers a convenience sample of 91 ECRs from all disciplines and half a dozen countries. The main findings being that while the large majority thought there would be a transformation there was no consensus as to what a transformation would look like, but there was agreement on it being one shaped by AI. The future appears rosy for journals, but less so for libraries and, importantly, for most ECRs, too.</p>","PeriodicalId":51636,"journal":{"name":"Learned Publishing","volume":"38 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/leap.2008","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learned Publishing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/leap.2008","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Early career researchers (ECRs) are in an ideal position to soothsay. Yet, much of what we know about the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) comes from vested interest groups, such as publishers, tech companies and industry leaders, which are strong on hyperbole, are superficial and, at best, narrow surveys. This paper seeks to redress this by providing deep empirical data from researchers, allowing us to hear researchers' views and ‘voices’. The data comes from a project, which focuses on the impact of AI on scholarly communications. From this study, we report on the perceived transformations to the scholarly communications system by AI and other forces. We were especially interested in discovering what future ECRs foresaw for the established pillars of the system—journals and libraries. The interview-based study covers a convenience sample of 91 ECRs from all disciplines and half a dozen countries. The main findings being that while the large majority thought there would be a transformation there was no consensus as to what a transformation would look like, but there was agreement on it being one shaped by AI. The future appears rosy for journals, but less so for libraries and, importantly, for most ECRs, too.

早期职业研究人员(ECRs)最有发言权。然而,我们对人工智能(AI)影响的了解大多来自出版商、科技公司和行业领导者等既得利益团体,这些团体夸夸其谈,流于表面,充其量只是狭隘的调查。本文试图通过提供来自研究人员的深度实证数据来纠正这种情况,让我们听到研究人员的观点和 "声音"。这些数据来自一个项目,该项目关注人工智能对学术交流的影响。通过这项研究,我们报告了人工智能和其他力量对学术交流系统的影响。我们尤其有兴趣了解 ECR 对该系统的既定支柱--期刊和图书馆--的未来展望。这项以访谈为基础的研究涵盖了 91 位 ECR,他们来自各个学科和十几个国家。主要发现是,虽然绝大多数人认为会发生转型,但对于转型的形式却没有达成共识,但大家一致认为转型是由人工智能塑造的。期刊的前景似乎一片光明,但图书馆的前景就不那么光明了,重要的是,大多数 ECR 也是如此。
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
Learned Publishing
Learned Publishing INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
17.90%
发文量
72
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信