Artificial Intelligence (AI) guidance for authors, peer reviewers, and editors: A content analysis of journal policies.

IF 4.4 1区 哲学 Q1 MEDICAL ETHICS
Deborah H Charbonneau, Mei Zhang
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence (AI) guidance for authors, peer reviewers, and editors: A content analysis of journal policies.","authors":"Deborah H Charbonneau, Mei Zhang","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2026.2632083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aims to examine how scholarly journals advise authors, peer reviewers, and journal editors about the acceptable use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the scholarly publishing process.<b>Methods:</b> Using a content analysis method, policies from 80 journals were collected in August 2024 from publicly available websites. Data from the journal policies related to AI authorship and allowable AI use by authors, peer reviewers, and editors were entered into a spreadsheet and analyzed using descriptive statistics.<b>Findings:</b> The results show that 62.5% (<i>n</i> = 50) of the journal policies mentioned AI. 96% of these journals did not permit AI to be listed as an author. 54% of journals allowed authors to use AI tools to improve language in their manuscript, whereas using AI to generate images was prohibited by 26% of journals. 64% of journals did not provide any AI-related guidance for peer reviewers/editors.<b>Conclusion:</b> This research advances the literature by detailing journal policies regarding AI authorship, the allowed use of AI for authors and peer reviewers, and disciplinary distinctions in AI treatment. The findings underscore the need for enhanced guidance directed at authors, peer reviewers, and editors regarding the ethical and appropriate application of AI tools.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"2632083"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2026.2632083","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aims to examine how scholarly journals advise authors, peer reviewers, and journal editors about the acceptable use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the scholarly publishing process.Methods: Using a content analysis method, policies from 80 journals were collected in August 2024 from publicly available websites. Data from the journal policies related to AI authorship and allowable AI use by authors, peer reviewers, and editors were entered into a spreadsheet and analyzed using descriptive statistics.Findings: The results show that 62.5% (n = 50) of the journal policies mentioned AI. 96% of these journals did not permit AI to be listed as an author. 54% of journals allowed authors to use AI tools to improve language in their manuscript, whereas using AI to generate images was prohibited by 26% of journals. 64% of journals did not provide any AI-related guidance for peer reviewers/editors.Conclusion: This research advances the literature by detailing journal policies regarding AI authorship, the allowed use of AI for authors and peer reviewers, and disciplinary distinctions in AI treatment. The findings underscore the need for enhanced guidance directed at authors, peer reviewers, and editors regarding the ethical and appropriate application of AI tools.

作者、同行评审和编辑的人工智能(AI)指导:期刊政策的内容分析。
本研究旨在研究学术期刊如何就人工智能(AI)在学术出版过程中的可接受使用向作者、同行审稿人和期刊编辑提供建议。方法:采用内容分析法,从公开网站收集2024年8月80篇期刊的政策。与作者、同行审稿人和编辑使用人工智能相关的期刊政策数据被输入到电子表格中,并使用描述性统计进行分析。结果显示,62.5% (n = 50)的期刊政策提到了人工智能。96%的期刊不允许AI被列为作者。54%的期刊允许作者使用人工智能工具来改进手稿中的语言,而26%的期刊禁止使用人工智能生成图像。64%的期刊没有为同行审稿人/编辑提供任何与人工智能相关的指导。结论:本研究通过详细介绍关于人工智能作者身份的期刊政策、允许作者和同行审稿人使用人工智能以及人工智能治疗的学科区别,推进了文献的发展。这些发现强调了在人工智能工具的道德和适当应用方面,有必要加强对作者、同行审稿人和编辑的指导。
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
4.90
自引率
14.70%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance is devoted to the examination and critical analysis of systems for maximizing integrity in the conduct of research. It provides an interdisciplinary, international forum for the development of ethics, procedures, standards policies, and concepts to encourage the ethical conduct of research and to enhance the validity of research results. The journal welcomes views on advancing the integrity of research in the fields of general and multidisciplinary sciences, medicine, law, economics, statistics, management studies, public policy, politics, sociology, history, psychology, philosophy, ethics, and information science. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书