AI use in peer review: Strict regulation may still be needed

Area of Science:

• Scientific publishing and manuscript evaluation.
• The role of artificial intelligence (AI) in academic research.

Background:

• Manuscript review is essential for scientific progress and integrity.
• Artificial intelligence (AI) offers potential efficiency in academic tasks, including writing.
• Current regulations on AI use in manuscript review are stricter than for AI in writing.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the appropriateness and implications of using artificial intelligence (AI) in manuscript peer review.
• To address the debate surrounding AI adoption in peer review due to reviewer shortages and perceived inequities.

Main Methods:

• This study is a conceptual analysis and discussion of current practices and potential future impacts.
• It examines arguments for and against the use of AI in peer review.
• It considers the regulatory landscape and ethical considerations.

Main Results:

• Peer review should be conducted by human experts ('peers') rather than AI.
• Broader AI use in review is advocated by some due to reviewer shortages and AI's acceptance in writing.
• The long-term effects of AI on scientific publishing and human cognition are currently unknown.

Conclusions:

• Strict regulation of AI in peer review must be maintained.
• Further research and evidence are required to confirm the usefulness and safety of AI in this critical scientific process.
• Prioritizing human oversight in peer review ensures scientific rigor and integrity.