首页|期刊导航|科技与出版|中国科技期刊使用人工智能政策的研究及对策建议

中国科技期刊使用人工智能政策的研究及对策建议OACHSSCD

Research and Strategic Recommendations on Use of AI Technologies in Chinese STM Journals:Nvivo Analysis Based on the Policy Texts of 40 Core STM Journals

中文摘要英文摘要

人工智能(AI)出现并迅速广泛应用于学术出版,在推动科研发展、提升出版效率的同时也带来了新的挑战,这迫切需要业内达成共识,规范作者、审稿人、编辑和出版单位等利益主体合理、负责任地使用AI.本文选取2024年中国科技期刊引证报告(核心版)综合评分前100的自然科学类与社会科学类期刊共200本作为研究对象,运用质性分析工具Nvivo 12 Plus对其AI使用政策文本进行分析,发现当前我国科技期刊在AI使用边界、披露要求及违规处理机制方面存在标准不统一、表述模糊等问题.基于发现的问题,本文系统梳理国内外科技期刊出版机构和学术组织规范使用AI的做法并提出针对性建议,以期为中国科技期刊制定符合我国学术出版实际并与国际规则接轨的AI使用政策框架提供参考.

Recently,artificial intelligence(AI)has developed rapidly.In the academic research field,AI has driven comprehensive innovation in research paradigms,theoretical modeling,and methodologies.In the academic publishing field,AI has reshaped the entire academic publication process,from manuscript writing,review,editing,and proofreading to dissemination.Moreover,AI has created a series of challenges for scientific research and academic publishing,such as the industrialization of"paper mills"and the fabrication of references.This urgently requires the academic publishing industry to reach a consensus;formulate clear norms and policies for the use of AI in academic publishing;and guide authors,reviewers,editors,and publishing units and other stakeholders to use AI reasonably and responsibly.This study selected 200 journals,including the top 100 natural science and social science journals in the 2024 Chinese Scientific and Technology Journal Citation Reports(Core Edition),as research objects and used the qualitative analysis tool Nvivo 12 Plus to analyze their AI-usage policy texts,aiming to provide references for Chinese scientific,technical,and medical(STM)journals in formulating AI usage policies and promoting their high-quality development.The number of reference points for author policies was the highest,totaling 531,followed by that for reviewer policies and editor policies,at 138 and 49 reference points,respectively.The number of reference points for publisher policies was the lowest,with only 29.Further analysis showed that regarding author policies,although Chinese STM journals have established tiered and categorized penalty mechanisms,there is a lack of consensus on requirements such as disclosure content,location,and statement templates.Regarding reviewer policies,Chinese STM journals clearly define the boundaries of using AI for review,but further clarification is needed on the responsibilities of reviewers and the disclosure requirements for AI usage.In terms of editor policies,Chinese STM journals have focused on regulating the scope of editors'prohibition of using AI but lack clear guidelines on the reasonable use of AI.In terms of publisher policies,Chinese STM journals lack comprehensive AI review and assessment mechanisms and a disclosure mechanism for AI usage.To this end,drawing on the practical experience of domestic and foreign STM journal publishing units and academic publishing organizations,four specific measures are proposed from the perspectives of authors,reviewers,editors,and publishing units as stakeholders.First,a disclosure mechanism for authors' use of AI is established from three dimensions:disclosure requirements,disclosure location,and content.Second,the principles of accountability and transparency should be adhered to,and the responsibility attribution and disclosure requirements for reviewers'use of AI should be clarified.Third,"human-machine collaborative"editing and publishing mechanism should be constructed by clarifying the boundaries of rights and responsibilities for AI use,establishing an infrastructure for AI-assisted editing and proofreading,and strengthening team development.Fourth,publishing units should establish AI usage policies covering the entire academic publishing process,forming a closed loop of"usage norms-review mechanisms-accountability mechanisms".

李慧;苏莉娜;周会霞;黎霜霜;王梦婷;谢邦彦;刘广宇

《科技与金融》编辑部,510033,广州||广东省科技合作研究促进中心,510033,广州《科技与金融》编辑部,510033,广州《科技与金融》编辑部,510033,广州《科技与金融》编辑部,510033,广州广东省科技合作研究促进中心,510033,广州《科技与金融》编辑部,510033,广州广东省科技合作研究促进中心,510033,广州

科技期刊人工智能政策文本质性研究

scientific,technical,and medical(STM)journalsartificial intelligence(AI)policy textsqualitative research

《科技与出版》 2026 (2)

96-107,12

2025年度韬奋基金会规划课题"科技期刊构建AI政策框架的研究"(TF2025107).

评论