Marija Franka Žuljević, Antonija Mijatović, Luciano D'andrea, Andrada Istrate, Nevien Kerk, Constantin Vică, Alexandra Zorilă, Hella von Unger, Ana Marušić
{"title":"Anticipating the unpredictable: A qualitative study on ethics experts' perspectives on review challenges related to AI.","authors":"Marija Franka Žuljević, Antonija Mijatović, Luciano D'andrea, Andrada Istrate, Nevien Kerk, Constantin Vică, Alexandra Zorilă, Hella von Unger, Ana Marušić","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2026.2744222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into research across disciplines, raising various ethical concerns related to bias, privacy, transparency, and accountability. However, less is known about how these challenges are addressed within research ethics review practices. This paper examines how ethics experts perceive and manage AI-related challenges in ethics review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Drawing on a qualitative study of 13 focus groups with 67 European ethics experts, we applied thematic analysis to identify key tensions shaping current review processes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our findings show that AI challenges basic assumptions of ethics review. Participants described AI as difficult to define, rapidly evolving, and not readily accommodated by ex-ante regulatory frameworks. Ethical issues were seen as emerging across the research lifecycle, often after initial review. This creates tensions between rule-based approaches, focused on compliance and risk minimization, and more trust-based models emphasizing researcher reflexivity and ongoing ethical judgment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We argue that AI highlights epistemic, temporal, and procedural limitations of existing ethics review systems. These findings suggest that ethics review of AI research may benefit from more anticipatory and flexible ethical governance, including iterative review mechanisms, interdisciplinary expertise, and continuous ethical engagement throughout the research process.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"2744222"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-08","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/10.1080/08989621.2026.2744222","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into research across disciplines, raising various ethical concerns related to bias, privacy, transparency, and accountability. However, less is known about how these challenges are addressed within research ethics review practices. This paper examines how ethics experts perceive and manage AI-related challenges in ethics review.
Methods: Drawing on a qualitative study of 13 focus groups with 67 European ethics experts, we applied thematic analysis to identify key tensions shaping current review processes.
Results: Our findings show that AI challenges basic assumptions of ethics review. Participants described AI as difficult to define, rapidly evolving, and not readily accommodated by ex-ante regulatory frameworks. Ethical issues were seen as emerging across the research lifecycle, often after initial review. This creates tensions between rule-based approaches, focused on compliance and risk minimization, and more trust-based models emphasizing researcher reflexivity and ongoing ethical judgment.
Conclusions: We argue that AI highlights epistemic, temporal, and procedural limitations of existing ethics review systems. These findings suggest that ethics review of AI research may benefit from more anticipatory and flexible ethical governance, including iterative review mechanisms, interdisciplinary expertise, and continuous ethical engagement throughout the research process.
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.