Abstract
This paper navigates the relationship between the growing influence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the foundational principles of academic integrity. It offers an in-depth analysis of how key academic stakeholders—publishers and universities—are crafting strategies and guidelines to integrate AI into the sphere of scholarly work. These efforts are not merely reactionary but are part of a broader initiative to harness AI’s potential while maintaining ethical standards. The exploration reveals a diverse array of stances, reflecting the varied applications of AI in academic settings. These range from conservative approaches emphasizing the need for stringent AI regulations to more progressive strategies that seek to leverage AI’s capabilities. The paper accentuates the importance of guidelines that are adaptable, transparent, and culturally sensitive, acknowledging the global context of academic research. It also highlights the pressing need for effective implementation and enforcement of these guidelines to ensure that the integration of AI into academia does not compromise the integrity of scholarly work. The conclusion emphasizes the dynamic balance required between embracing AI’s transformative potential and upholding the timeless values of academic rigor and ethical research. This comprehensive analysis aims to provide a detailed perspective on the evolving role of AI in academia, fostering a dialog on how best to navigate this new technological frontier while preserving the sanctity of academic scholarship.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Not applicable.
References
Abdelaal E, Mills J, Walpita Gamage S (2019) Artificial intelligence is a tool for cheating academic integrity. In: Proceedings of the AAEE 2019 annual conference, Brisbane, Australia, 8–11 December 2019. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339375213_Artificial_Intelligence_Is_a_Tool_for_Cheating_Academic_Integrity. Accessed 12 Feb 2024
Al-haimi B, Hujainah F, Nasir D, Alhroob E (2021) Higher education institutions with artificial intelligence: roles, promises, and requirements. In: Hamdan A, Hassanien AE, Khamis R, Alareeni B, Razzaque A, Awwad B (eds) Appl artif intell bus educ healthc. Springer, Cham, pp 221–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72080-3_13
APA (2023) APA journals policy on generative AI: additional guidance. https://www.apaorg. https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/resources/publishing-tips/policy-generative-ai. Accessed 30 Jan 2024
APS (2023) Appropriate use of AI-based writing tools. Phys Rev J. https://journals.aps.org/authors/ai-based-writing-tools. Accessed 29 March 2024
AUC (2023) AUC’s statement on the use of artificial intelligence tools. The American University in Cairo. https://www.aucegypt.edu/about/leadership/provost/use-of-artificial-intelligence-tools. Accessed 30 Jan 2024
Banik GM, Baysinger G, Kamat PV, Pienta N (eds) (2020) The ACS guide to scholarly communication. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsguide
Beckers S (2018) AAAI: an argument against artificial intelligence. In: Müller VC (ed) Philosophy of artificial intelligence, 2017. Springer, Cham, pp 235–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96448-5_25
Bin-Nashwan SA, Sadallah M, Bouteraa M (2023) Use of ChatGPT in academia: academic integrity hangs in the balance. Technol Soc 75:102370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102370
Buiten MC (2019) Towards intelligent regulation of artificial intelligence. Eur J Risk Regul 10:41–59. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2019.8
Chan CKY (2023) A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 20:38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00408-3
Chen L (2024) LibGuides: library essentials: academic integrity essentials. https://libguides.nus.edu.sg/new2nus/acadintegrity. Accessed 30 Jan 2024
Chen TC, Kaminski E, Koduri L, Singer A, Singer J, Couldwell M et al (2023) Chat GPT as a neuro-score calculator: analysis of a large language model’s performance on various neurological exam grading scales. World Neurosurg 179:e342–e347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2023.08.088
CORE (2021) Authorship and AI tools. COPE Comm Publ Ethics. https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author. Accessed 30 Jan 2024
CORE (2023) Authorship and AI tools. COPE Comm Publ Ethics. https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author. Accessed 29 March 2024
Coser LA (1975) Publishers as gatekeepers of ideas. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci 421:14–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271627542100103
CUP (2024) Authorship and contributorship. Camb Core. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/authors/publishing-ethics/research-publishing-ethics-guidelines-for-journals/authorship-and-contributorship. Accessed 29 March 2024
Elsevier (2024) Publishing ethics. Elsevier policy. WwwElsevierCom. https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies-and-standards/publishing-ethics. Accessed 29 March 2024
Farina M, Zhdanov P, Karimov A, Lavazza A (2022) AI and society: a virtue ethics approach. AI Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01545-5
Faustine N (2023) The UK’s top universities reached an agreement on how to deal with generative AI. Quartz. https://qz.com/russel-uk-universities-generative-ai-students-1850603771. Accessed 30 Jan 2024
Flanagin A, Kendall-Taylor J, Bibbins-Domingo K (2023) Guidance for authors, peer reviewers, and editors on use of AI, language models, and chatbots. JAMA 330:702–703. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023.12500
Frontiers (2024) Frontiers. Author guidelines. https://www.frontiersin.org/guidelines/author-guidelines. Accessed 29 March 2024
Garcia MB, Using AI (2024) Tools in Writing peer review reports: should academic journals embrace the use of chatGPT? Ann Biomed Eng 52:139–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-023-03299-7
Ghassemi M, Birhane A, Bilal M, Kankaria S, Malone C, Mollick E et al (2023) ChatGPT one year on: who is using it, how and why? Nature 624:39–41. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-03798-6
Giovanola B, Tiribelli S (2023a) Correction: Beyond bias and discrimination: redefining the AI ethics principle of fairness in healthcare machine-learning algorithms. AI Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01722-0
Giovanola B, Tiribelli S (2023b) Beyond bias and discrimination: redefining the AI ethics principle of fairness in healthcare machine-learning algorithms. AI Soc 38:549–563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01455-6
Graham R (2022) Discourse analysis of academic debate of ethics for AGI. AI Soc 37:1519–1532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01228-7
Guersenzvaig A, Sánchez-Monedero J (2024) AI research assistants, intrinsic values, and the science we want. AI Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01861-4
Hames I (ed) (2007) Peer review and manuscript management in scientific journals: guidelines for good practice, 1st ed. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470750803
Harris J, Anthis JR (2021) The moral consideration of artificial entities: a literature review. Sci Eng Ethics 27:53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00331-8
Helen S (2023) UCT launches AI guides for staff and students. http://www.news.uct.ac.za/article/-2023-09-18-uct-launches-ai-guides-for-staff-and-students. Accessed 30 Jan 2024
Hine C (2021) Evaluating the prospects for university-based ethical governance in artificial intelligence and data-driven innovation. Res Ethics 17:464–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161211022790
IEEE (2024) Submission and peer review policies. IEEE Author Cent J. https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/submission-and-peer-review-policies/. Accessed 29 March 2024
Inam M, Sheikh S, Minhas AMK, Vaughan EM, Krittanawong C, Samad Z et al (2024) A review of top cardiology and cardiovascular medicine journal guidelines regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence tools in scientific writing. Curr Probl Cardiol 49:102387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102387
Johnson DG, Verdicchio M (2024) The sociotechnical entanglement of AI and values. AI Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01852-5
Lõuk K (2023) Relevance and challenges of ethics committees. In: González-Esteban E, Feenstra RA, Camarinha-Matos LM (eds) Ethics responsible research and innovive in practice ETHNA system project. Springer, Cham, pp 125–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33177-0_8
Malik AR, Pratiwi Y, Andajani K, Numertayasa IW, Suharti S, Darwis A et al (2023) Exploring artificial intelligence in academic essay: higher education student’s perspective. Int J Educ Res Open 5:100296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2023.100296
McCradden MD, Baba A, Saha A, Ahmad S, Boparai K, Fadaiefard P et al (2020) Ethical concerns around use of artificial intelligence in health care research from the perspective of patients with meningioma, caregivers and health care providers: a qualitative study. Can Med Assoc Open Access J 8:E90–E95. https://doi.org/10.9778/cmajo.20190151
McKay F, Williams BJ, Prestwich G, Bansal D, Treanor D, Hallowell N (2023) Artificial intelligence and medical research databases: ethical review by data access committees. BMC Med Ethics 24:49. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-023-00927-8
MDPI (2023) MDPI’s updated guidelines on artificial intelligence and authorship. https://www.mdpi.com/about/announcements/5687. Accessed 29 March 2024
MIT News Office (2021) Media advisory—MIT researchers: AI policy needed to manage impacts, build more equitable systems. MIT News Mass Inst Technol. https://news.mit.edu/2021/media-advisory-mit-researchers-ai-policy-needed-manage-impacts-build-more-equitable-systems. Accessed 30 Jan 2024
Munn L, Magee L, Arora V (2023) Truth machines: synthesizing veracity in AI language models. AI Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01756-4
National Tsing Hua University (2023) NTHU establishes guidelines for AI in education. https://nthu-en.site.nthu.edu.tw/p/406-1003-249686,r4806.php. Accessed 30 Ja 2024
Nature Portfolio (2024) Artificial intelligence (AI). Nature Portfolio. https://www.nature.com/nature-portfolio/editorial-policies/ai. Accessed 29 March 2024
OCS (2023) Generative AI policy guidance. Office of Community Standards. https://communitystandards.stanford.edu/generative-ai-policy-guidance. Accessed 30 Jan 2024
OUP (2024) Ethics. Oxf Acad. https://academic.oup.com/pages/authoring/journals/preparing_your_manuscript/ethics. Accessed 29 March 2024
Oxford University (2023) Publication and authorship. https://researchsupport.admin.ox.ac.uk/governance/integrity/publication. Accessed 30 Jan 2024
Pisica AI, Edu T, Zaharia RM, Zaharia R (2023) Implementing artificial intelligence in higher education: pros and cons from the perspectives of academics. Societies 13:118. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13050118
Plos (2024) Ethical publishing practice. PLOS ONE. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/ethical-publishing-practice. Accessed 29 March 2024
Rielly M (2023) Artificial intelligence. https://www.plagiarism.admin.cam.ac.uk/what-academic-misconduct/artificial-intelligence. Accessed 30 Jan 2024
Robinson M (2023) Taylor & Francis clarifies the responsible use of AI tools in academic content creation. Taylor Francis Newsroom. https://newsroom.taylorandfrancisgroup.com/taylor-francis-clarifies-the-responsible-use-of-ai-tools-in-academic-content-creation/. Accessed 29 March 2024
Royal Society (2024) Openness. Royal Society. https://royalsociety.org/journals/ethics-policies/openness/. Accessed 29 March 2024
Sage (2024) Using AI in peer review and publishing. SAGE Publications Inc. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/using-ai-in-peer-review-and-publishing. Accessed 29 March 2024
Springer (2023) AI principles. Springer Nature, Springer Nature Group, Springer Nature. https://group.springernature.com/gp/group/taking-responsibility/ai-principles. Accessed 29 March 2024
The University of Melbourne (2023) Inquiry into the use of generative AI in the education system. https://about.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0032/396446/UoM-Submission-Inquiry-into-Generative-AI-in-Education-FINAL.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2024
Toy T (2023) Transparency in AI. AI Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01786-y
Uddin M, Chowdhury A, Kabir MA (2024) Legal and ethical aspects of deploying artificial intelligence in climate-smart agriculture. AI Soc 39:221–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01421-2
UTSGS (2023) Guidance on the appropriate use of generative artificial intelligence in graduate theses. School of Graduate Studies. https://www.sgs.utoronto.ca/about/guidance-on-the-use-of-generative-artificial-intelligence/. Accessed 30 Jan 2024
Wong C (2024) AI-generated images and video are here: how could they shape research? Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00659-8
Yeung LKC, Tam CSY, Lau SSS, Ko MM (2023) Living with AI personal assistant: an ethical appraisal. AI Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01776-0
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Funding
Not applicable.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Ethics approval and consent to participate.
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Gulumbe, B.H., Audu, S.M. & Hashim, A.M. Balancing AI and academic integrity: what are the positions of academic publishers and universities?. AI & Soc (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-01946-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-01946-8