Guidance needed for using artificial intelligence to screen journal submissions for misconduct

被引:7
作者
Hosseini, Mohammad [1 ]
Resnik, David B. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Northwestern Univ, Feinberg Sch Med, 680 N Lake Shore Dr, Suite 1400, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[2] NIEHS, Durham, NC USA
[3] NIH, Durham, NC USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Publication ethics; research misconduct; artificial intelligence; policy; transparency;
D O I
10.1177/17470161241254052
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Journals and publishers are increasingly using artificial intelligence (AI) to screen submissions for potential misconduct, including plagiarism and data or image manipulation. While using AI can enhance the integrity of published manuscripts, it can also increase the risk of false/unsubstantiated allegations. Ambiguities related to journals' and publishers' responsibilities concerning fairness and transparency also raise ethical concerns. In this Topic Piece, we offer the following guidance: (1) All cases of suspected misconduct identified by AI tools should be carefully reviewed by humans to verify accuracy and ensure accountability; (2) Journals/publishers that use AI tools to detect misconduct should use only well-tested and reliable tools, remain vigilant concerning forms of misconduct that cannot be detected by these tools, and stay abreast of advancements in technology; (3) Journals/publishers should inform authors about irregularities identified by AI tools and give them a chance to respond before forwarding allegations to their institutions in accordance with Committee on Publication Ethics guidelines; (4) Journals/publishers that use AI tools to detect misconduct should screen all relevant submissions and not just random/purposefully selected submissions; and (5) Journals should inform authors about their definition of misconduct, their use of AI tools to detect misconduct, and their policies and procedures for responding to suspected cases of misconduct.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 8
页数:8
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] Benderly BL., 2016, SCIENCE, DOI [10.1126/science.caredit.a1600165., DOI 10.1126/SCIENCE.CAREDIT.A1600165]
  • [2] The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications
    Bik, Elisabeth M.
    Casadevall, Arturo
    Fang, Ferric C.
    [J]. MBIO, 2016, 7 (03):
  • [3] A comprehensive survey on image authentication for tamper detection with localization
    Chennamma, H. R.
    Madhushree, B.
    [J]. MULTIMEDIA TOOLS AND APPLICATIONS, 2023, 82 (02) : 1873 - 1904
  • [4] How ChatGPT and other AI tools could disrupt scientific publishing
    Conroy, Gemma
    [J]. NATURE, 2023, 622 (7982) : 234 - 236
  • [5] COPE Council, 2021, COPE discussion document. Artificial intelligence (AI) in decision making, DOI [10.24318/9kvAgrnJ, DOI 10.24318/9KVAGRNJ]
  • [6] COPE Council, 2024, COPE GUIDELINES COOP, DOI [10.24318/cope.2018.1.3, DOI 10.24318/COPE.2018.1.3]
  • [7] COPE STM, 2022, PAP MILLS RES REP CO, DOI [10.24318/jtbG8IHL, DOI 10.24318/JTBG8IHL]
  • [8] D'Agostino S., 2023, Inside Higher Ed
  • [9] David S., 2023, BIORXIV, DOI [10.1101/2023.09.03.556099v1, DOI 10.1101/2023.09.03.556099V1]
  • [10] De Rose G., 2024, WILEY ANNOUNCES PILO