What question did this study set out to answer?

The aim is to evaluate existing guidelines from publishers and journals regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) by authors.

January 31, 2024Open Access

Publishers’ and journals’ instructions to authors on use of generative artificial intelligence in academic and scientific publishing: bibliometric analysis

CGConner GanjaviUniversity of Southern California MEMichael EpplerKeck Hospital of USC APAsli PekcanChildren's Hospital of Los Angeles

Key Points

The aim is to evaluate existing guidelines from publishers and journals regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) by authors.
Conducted a bibliometric analysis of guidelines provided by various publishers and journals.
Examined the differences in allowable uses of GAI and disclosure requirements.
Identified the lack of standardization among publishers and journals.
Found significant variability in GAI guidelines among publishers, leading to confusion for authors.
Highlighted the potential impact of these discrepancies on scientific integrity and publishing standards.
Emphasized the necessity for standardized guidelines to enhance clarity and effectiveness.

Abstract

Guidelines by some top publishers and journals on the use of GAI by authors are lacking. Among those that provided guidelines, the allowable uses of GAI and how it should be disclosed varied substantially, with this heterogeneity persisting in some instances among affiliated publishers and journals. Lack of standardization places a burden on authors and could limit the effectiveness of the regulations. As GAI continues to grow in popularity, standardized guidelines to protect the integrity of scientific output are needed.

Demander à l'IA

Bookmark

View Full Paper