The world of academic publishing is facing a potential crisis as an editor resigns over concerns about the misuse of artificial intelligence (AI). Michael Okun, an associate professor of neuroscience at the University of Nottingham, has stepped down from his role as an associate editor of the journal Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience due to the publisher's AI system, AIRA, which he believes undermines academic integrity.
Okun's resignation comes after he encountered a troubling issue with AIRA's reviewer selection process. When he sent out reviewer requests for a manuscript on neuronal networks, AIRA began sending out its own requests to other researchers, including those with no relevant expertise. This led Okun to flag the problem, but the journal officials instructed him to ignore AIRA's requests and continue seeking reviewers himself. When he did so, AIRA revoked all his other invitations, which Okun found unacceptable.
This incident highlights a deeper concern about the role of AI in academic publishing. Okun argues that the journal's primary goal is to publish as many submissions as possible, and AIRA's features are designed to minimize human editors' involvement. He believes that this approach prioritizes quantity over quality, which is a significant issue in the academic community.
The use of AI in peer review is not new, and many publishers have embraced it to streamline the process. However, Okun's experience suggests that the line between automation and human judgment is blurred. While AI can assist in finding potential reviewers, the final decision should always rest with a human editor. This is a critical aspect of maintaining academic integrity and ensuring the quality of research.
Frontiers' chief executive editor, Frederick Fenter, acknowledges the issue and has initiated an internal review to address the communication breakdown. He emphasizes that editors retain full discretion over AI suggestions and can review, modify, and assign reviewers as needed. Fenter also highlights the benefits of AI assistance, such as a 30% reduction in time to secure peer reviewers and positive feedback from authors.
Despite the controversy, Fenter argues that AI has a role to play in scholarly publishing, as long as it is used responsibly. He mentions the dedicated Research Integrity Team that oversees automated quality checks and the commitment to keeping human expertise at the core of peer review. However, Okun's resignation serves as a reminder that the balance between automation and human judgment must be carefully maintained to preserve the integrity of academic research.
This incident raises important questions about the future of academic publishing and the role of AI. As AI continues to advance, it is crucial to ensure that it complements human expertise rather than replacing it. The academic community must engage in an open dialogue about the responsible use of AI to maintain the high standards of scholarly publishing.
