首页|期刊导航|现代情报|期刊AI政策与信息资源管理研究AI4SS范式的协调研究

期刊AI政策与信息资源管理研究AI4SS范式的协调研究OACHSSCD

Coordination Between Journals'AI Policies and AI4SS Paradigm in Information Resource Management Research

中文摘要英文摘要

[目的/意义]AI4SS给期刊界和学术界带来学术监管与学科发展的协调问题.以促进AI4SS范式的信息资源管理研究为出发点,调研当前期刊的AI政策,对未来AI政策调整有借鉴意义.[方法/过程]梳理国际上期刊、出版机构的AI政策及指南,将其与AI4SS的倡导进行对比,发现二者之间的冲突.[结果/结论]当前期刊的AI政策存在透明度与规范性、模糊性与灵活性、AI检测指标、对审稿方的要求、合成数据的应用、"人—智"关系等方面的问题.对此,本文提出"4+1+1"的灵活治理框架及针对性的建议.

[Purpose/Significance]Generative Artificial Intelligence(GenAI)has rapidly penetrated all stages of social science research,catalyzing rise of the Artificial Intelligence for Social Science(AI4SS)paradigm and reshaping the landscape of the research.This transformation spans research tools,synthetic data,simulation experiments,and human-AI collaboration.Against this backdrop,the global scholarly publishing sector faces an escalating governance dilemma:conventional academic regulatory systems,designed for traditional research paradigms,fail to accommodate the emerging methodologies,ethical risks,and uncertainties introduced by GenAI.Current journal AI policies tend to adopt strict regulatory measures,which go against the original intention of AI4SS to promote innovation.Existing research on journal AI policies primarily concentrates on descriptive summarization of individual journals'policy provisions,and most relevant recommendations are proposed solely from the perspective of ethical norms.Therefore,studying journal AI policies from the perspective of proactively embracing AI4SS research paradigm is of great significance.[Method/Process]First,the study collected original journal AI policies from two major data sources:official websites and social media platforms,such as WeChat Official Accounts.Second,the study examined these policies from multiple perspectives,including the organization and retrieval of journal AI policies,the common content of journal AI policies,the disciplinary charac-teristics of journal AI policies,the adoption of general AI guidelines,and the dynamic evolution of journal AI policies.Third,the study compared the positional conflicts between journals and AI4SS with respect to AI application scenarios and normative requirements.[Result/Conclusion]The findings reveal that current journals'AI policies have multiple issues,including insufficient transparency and standardization in policy organization,a misaligned trade-off between normative clarity and operational flexibility,unscientific and incomplete AI content detection indicator systems,excessively rigid and one-sided constraints on peer reviewers,ambiguous attitudes towards synthetic data,and ill-defined boundaries for human-AI collabo-rative research.In response to these limitations,and in light of the characteristics of research under AI4SS paradigm and the position of journals,the study proposes a"4+1+1"governance framework for journal AI policies and puts forward tar-geted optimization recommendations."4"refers to a general AI policy governance framework com-prising four pillars:explicit and strict regulation,flexible response,proactive guidance,and deferred policy formulation."1+1"means that,based upon this general governance framework,journals continuously make flexible adjustments as time evolves,and every journal AI policy has journal-specific characteristics.The study points out three reasons why GenAI cannot be listed as an author on research papers.Finally,the study categorizes human-AI collaboration under AI4SS paradigm into three types according to the depth of GenAI's involvement in research and its degree of subjectivity in the research workflow,and pro-poses differentiated measures for each type.

曹树金;王锡霖

山东理工大学信息管理学院,山东 淄博 255000||中山大学信息管理学院,广东 广州 510006山东理工大学信息管理学院,山东 淄博 255000

社会科学

学术期刊AI政策AI4SS信息资源管理研究生成式AI人智协同

academic journalAI policyAI4SSinformation resource management researchGenAIhuman-AI collaboration

《现代情报》 2026 (9)

34-46,13

10.3969/j.issn.1008-0821.2026.09.004

评论