Generative AI for Academic Publishing? Some Thoughts About Epistemic Diversity and the Pursuit of Truth

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18357/kula.287

Keywords:

generative AI, scholarly communication, academic publishing , epistemic diversity, bibliodiversity, machine learning, large language models, biases

Abstract

The uses of generative AI have prompted both positive and negative responses. This short commentary contemplates potential issues concerning bibliodiversity, epistemic diversity, and data surveillance. It also cautions the potential erosion of public trust in academic publishing in the age of generative AI. Invoking the Sokal hoax, the commentary sheds light on what it means when knowledge, experience, expertise, and the pursuit of truth are on the line. 

This commentary is part of the section "AI and Academic Publishing."

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Beigel, Fernanda. 2021. “A Multi-Scale Perspective for Assessing Publishing Circuits in Non-Hegemonic Countries.” Tapuya: Latin American Science, Technology and Society 4 (1): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 25729861.2020.1845923.

Berger, Monica. 2021. “Bibliodiversity at the Centre: Decolonizing Open Access.” Development and Change 52 (2): 383–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12634.

Carpenter, Todd A. 2024. “Let’s Be Cautious as We Cede Reading to Machines.” The Scholarly Kitchen, January 25, 2024. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2024/01/25/lets-be-cautious-as-we-cede-reading-to-machines. Archived at: https://perma.cc/NT5N-ZLPS.

Demeter, Marton, and Tamas Toth. 2020. “The World-Systemic Network of Global Elite Sociology: The Western Male Monoculture at Faculties of the Top One-Hundred Sociology Departments of the World.” Scientometrics 124 (3): 2469–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03563-w.

Editors of Lingua Franca, eds. 2000. The Sokal Hoax: The Sham That Shook the Academy. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Eubanks, Virginia. 2017. Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Evans, Ian. 2024. “How Researchers Can Use GenAI to Get the Info They Need Quicker Than Ever.” Elsevier Connect, February 15, 2024. https://www.elsevier.com/connect/how-researchers-can-use-genai-to-get-the-info-they-need-quicker-than-ever. Archived at: https://perma.cc/XB47-VMZB.

Gross, Paul R., and Norman Levitt. 1994. Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Grove, Jack. 2024. “Elsevier Launches Scopus AI Bot for Literature Reviews.” Times Higher Education, January 16, 2024. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/elsevier-launches-scopus-ai-bot-literature-reviews. Archived at: https://perma.cc/Y3CR-QRMM.

Lamdan, Sarah. 2023. Data Cartels: The Companies That Control and Monopolize Our Information. Redwood City: Stanford University Press.

Ma, Lai. 2023a. “Information, Platformized.” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 74 (2): 273–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24713.

Ma, Lai. 2023b. “The Platformisation of Scholarly Information and How to Fight It.” LIBER Quarterly: The Journal of the Association of European Research Libraries 33 (1): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.53377/lq.13561.

Merchant, Brian. 2023. Blood in the Machine: The Origins of the Rebellion Against Big Tech. New York: Little, Brown and Company.

Merton, Robert K. 1968. “The Matthew Effect in Science: The Reward and Communication Systems of Science Are Considered.” Science 159 (3810): 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56.

Mills, David, Abigail Branford, Kelsey Inouye, Natasha Robinson, and Patricia Kingori. 2021. “‘Fake’ Journals and the Fragility of Authenticity: Citation Indexes, ‘Predatory’ Publishing, and the African Research Ecosystem.” Journal of African Cultural Studies 33 (3): 276–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/13696815.2020.1864304.

Pearson, Jordan. 2024. “Scientific Journal Publishes AI-Generated Rat with Gigantic Penis in Worrying Incident.” Vice, February 15, 2024. https://www.vice.com/en/article/dy3jbz/scientific-journal-frontiers-publishes-ai-generated-rat-with-gigantic-penis-in-worrying-incident. Archived at: https://perma.cc/U4BM-432P.

Pooley, Jeff. 2022. “Surveillance Publishing.” The Journal of Electronic Publishing 25 (1). https://doi.org/10.3998/jep.1874.

Pooley, Jeff. 2024. “Large Language Publishing.” Upstream, January 2, 2024. https://doi.org/10.54900/zg929-e9595.

Sokal, Alan. (1996) 2000a. “Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity.” In The Sokal Hoax: The Sham That Shook the Academy. Edited by the editors of Lingua Franca, 11–45. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Sokal, Alan. (1996) 2000b. “Revelation: A Physicist Experiments with Cultural Studies.” In The Sokal Hoax: The Sham That Shook the Academy. Edited by the editors of Lingua Franca, 49–53. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Van Noorden, Richard. 2023. “More Than 10,000 Research Papers Were Retracted in 2023 — a New Record.” Nature 624: 479–81. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-03974-8.

Van Noorden, Richard, and Jeffrey M. Perkel. 2023. “AI and Science: What 1,600 Researchers Think.” Nature 621: 672–75. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-02980-0.

Yoose, Becky, and Nick Shockey. 2024. “Navigating Risk in Vendor Data Privacy Practices: An Analysis of Elsevier’s ScienceDirect.” SPARC. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10078610.

Published

2024-07-26

How to Cite

Ma, Lai. 2024. “Generative AI for Academic Publishing? Some Thoughts About Epistemic Diversity and the Pursuit of Truth”. KULA: Knowledge Creation, Dissemination, and Preservation Studies 7 (1):1-5. https://doi.org/10.18357/kula.287.

Issue

Section

Commentaries

Categories

Similar Articles

<< < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.