- Researchers have a pretty good idea about what they consider good and bad research practice, and tools like GenAI are used in accordance with recommendations about good, ethical practice.
Is anyone else getting a peculiar email about retracting articles from "Pakistan Journal of Life and Social Sciences"?
- There are a lot of myths and anecdotal knowledge out there - we need to talk more about what we want to use GenAI for; including why, how, and when.
We identified three main perceptions of the role of GenAI in research, and a number of recommendations for writing policies about GenAI for academic research. Some of the most important takeaways here are:
Added context, since polls can only be very short:
It seems like a somewhat standard practice now, that editors create reviewer accounts without consent or contact, as a service, so the potential reviewer doesn't have to do it themself. It used to be the opposite. #peerreview #reviewer2
Yup
My colleagues and I have been sharing blogs and news about a survey we did on how researchers use generative AI - that study is now published and openly available here:
doi.org/10.1016/j.te...
- What this is, varies by field, and especially how you produce new knowledge. What is fine in one field may not be in another - guidelines and policies need to reflect or accomodate this.
