Using AI to enhance scientific discourse by transforming journals into learning communities.

IF 2.1 Q1 REHABILITATION
Archives of physiotherapy Pub Date : 2025-05-05 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.33393/aop.2025.3442
Michael Rowe
{"title":"Using AI to enhance scientific discourse by transforming journals into learning communities.","authors":"Michael Rowe","doi":"10.33393/aop.2025.3442","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The introduction of generative AI into scientific publishing presents both opportunities and risks for the research ecosystem. While AI could enhance knowledge creation and streamline research processes, it may also amplify existing problems within the system. In this viewpoint article, I suggest that generative AI is likely to reinforce harmful processes unless scientific journals and editors use these technologies to transform themselves into vibrant knowledge communities that facilitate meaningful discourse and collaborative learning. I describe how AI could support this transformation by surfacing connections between researchers' work, making peer review more dialogic, enhancing post-publication discourse, and enabling multimodal knowledge translation. However, implementing this vision faces significant challenges, deeply rooted in the entrenched incentives of the current academic publishing system. Universities evaluate faculty based largely on publication counts, funding bodies rely on traditional metrics for grant decisions, and publishers benefit from maintaining existing models. Making meaningful change, therefore, requires coordinated action across multiple stakeholders who must be willing to accept short-term costs for long-term systemic benefits. The key to success lies in consistently returning to journals' core purpose: advancing scientific knowledge through thoughtful research and professional dialogue. By reimagining journals as AI-supported communities rather than metrics-driven repositories, we can better serve both the scientific community and the broader society it aims to benefit.</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"15 ","pages":"90-96"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12051907/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of physiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33393/aop.2025.3442","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The introduction of generative AI into scientific publishing presents both opportunities and risks for the research ecosystem. While AI could enhance knowledge creation and streamline research processes, it may also amplify existing problems within the system. In this viewpoint article, I suggest that generative AI is likely to reinforce harmful processes unless scientific journals and editors use these technologies to transform themselves into vibrant knowledge communities that facilitate meaningful discourse and collaborative learning. I describe how AI could support this transformation by surfacing connections between researchers' work, making peer review more dialogic, enhancing post-publication discourse, and enabling multimodal knowledge translation. However, implementing this vision faces significant challenges, deeply rooted in the entrenched incentives of the current academic publishing system. Universities evaluate faculty based largely on publication counts, funding bodies rely on traditional metrics for grant decisions, and publishers benefit from maintaining existing models. Making meaningful change, therefore, requires coordinated action across multiple stakeholders who must be willing to accept short-term costs for long-term systemic benefits. The key to success lies in consistently returning to journals' core purpose: advancing scientific knowledge through thoughtful research and professional dialogue. By reimagining journals as AI-supported communities rather than metrics-driven repositories, we can better serve both the scientific community and the broader society it aims to benefit.

通过将期刊转变为学习社区,利用人工智能加强科学话语。
将生成式人工智能引入科学出版为研究生态系统带来了机遇和风险。虽然人工智能可以增强知识创造和简化研究过程,但它也可能放大系统内现有的问题。在这篇观点文章中,我认为除非科学期刊和编辑使用这些技术将自己转变为促进有意义的话语和协作学习的充满活力的知识社区,否则生成式人工智能可能会加强有害的过程。我描述了人工智能如何通过揭示研究人员工作之间的联系、使同行评议更具对话性、增强发表后话语以及实现多模态知识翻译来支持这种转变。然而,实现这一愿景面临着重大挑战,这些挑战深深植根于当前学术出版系统根深蒂固的激励机制。大学主要根据出版数量来评估教师,资助机构依靠传统的指标来决定拨款,出版商则从维持现有模式中受益。因此,要做出有意义的改变,就需要多个利益相关者之间的协调行动,这些利益相关者必须愿意为长期的系统性利益接受短期成本。成功的关键在于不断回归期刊的核心宗旨:通过深思熟虑的研究和专业对话推进科学知识。通过将期刊重新构想为人工智能支持的社区,而不是指标驱动的知识库,我们可以更好地服务于科学界及其旨在受益的更广泛的社会。
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
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
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