Resnik David B, Hosseini Mohammad
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Durham, NC, USA.
Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Account Res. 2025 Mar 24:1-13. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2481949.
Currently there is a broad consensus among scholars that artificial intelligence (AI) tools can be used in research and publication, and that their use should be disclosed. Publishers and influential organizations, like the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, have developed different and sometimes contradictory disclosure policies. We review some of these policies, examine the ethical reasons for disclosing AI use in research, and develop a framework for disclosure. We distinguish between mandatory, optional, and unnecessary disclosure of AI use, arguing that disclosure should be mandatory only when AI use is intentional and substantial. AI use is intentional when it is directly employed with a specific goal or purpose in mind. AI use is substantial when it 1) produces evidence, analysis, or discussion that supports or elaborates on the conclusions/findings of a study; or 2) directly affects the content of the research/publication. To support the application of our framework, we state three criteria for identifying substantial AI uses in research: a) using AI to make decisions that directly affect research results; b) using AI to generate content, data or images; and c) using AI to analyze content, data or images. Disclosure should be mandatory when AI use meets one of these criteria.
目前，学者们已达成广泛共识，即人工智能（AI）工具可用于研究和出版，且应披露其使用情况。出版商和有影响力的组织，如国际医学期刊编辑委员会，制定了不同且有时相互矛盾的披露政策。我们回顾其中一些政策，审视在研究中披露人工智能使用情况的伦理原因，并制定一个披露框架。我们区分了人工智能使用的强制披露、自愿披露和非必要披露，认为只有当人工智能的使用是有意且实质性的时，才应进行强制披露。当人工智能的使用是出于特定目标或目的而直接进行时，即为有意使用。当人工智能的使用：1）产生支持或阐述研究结论/结果的证据、分析或讨论；或2）直接影响研究/出版物的内容时，即为实质性使用。为支持我们框架的应用，我们阐述了识别研究中人工智能实质性使用的三个标准：a）使用人工智能做出直接影响研究结果的决策；b）使用人工智能生成内容、数据或图像；c）使用人工智能分析内容、数据或图像。当人工智能的使用符合这些标准之一时，就应进行强制披露。
