Research Article: Bibliometric Analysis of Publisher and Journal Instructions to Authors on Generative-AI in Academic and Scientific Publishing (preprint)
Michael B. Eppler University of Southern California
Asli Pekcan University of Southern California
Brett Biedermann University of Southern California
Andre Abreu University of Southern California
Gary S. Collins University of Oxford
]Inderbir S. Gill University of Southern California
Giovanni E. Cacciamani University of Southern California
Source
via arXiv DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2307.11918
Abstract
We aim to determine the extent and content of guidance for authors regarding the use of generative-AI (GAI), Generative Pretrained models (GPTs) and Large Language Models (LLMs) powered tools among the top 100 academic publishers and journals in science. The websites of these publishers and journals were screened from between 19th and 20th May 2023.
Among the largest 100 publishers, 17% provided guidance on the use of GAI, of which 12 (70.6%) were among the top 25 publishers.
Figure 1. Types of recommendations and types of disclosures recommended in the authors’ guidelines from a) the top largest publishers and b) the top-ranked scientific journals Source: arXiv:2307.11918v1
Among the top 100 journals, 70% have provided guidance on GAI. Of those with guidance, 94.1% of publishers and 95.7% of journals prohibited the inclusion of GAI as an author. Four journals (5.7%) explicitly prohibit the use of GAI in the generation of a manuscript, while 3 (17.6%) publishers and 15 (21.4%) journals indicated their guidance exclusively applies to the writing process. When disclosing the use of GAI, 42.8% of publishers and 44.3% of journals included specific disclosure criteria. There was variability in guidance of where to disclose the use of GAI, including in the methods, acknowledgments, cover letter, or a new section. There was also variability in how to access GAI guidance and the linking of journal and publisher instructions to authors. There is a lack of guidance by some top publishers and journals on the use of GAI by authors. Among those publishers and journals that provide guidance, there is substantial heterogeneity in the allowable uses of GAI and in how it should be disclosed, with this heterogeneity persisting among affiliated publishers and journals in some instances. The lack of standardization burdens authors and threatens to limit the effectiveness of these regulations. There is a need for standardized guidelines in order to protect the integrity of scientific output as GAI continues to grow in popularity.
Gary Price (gprice@gmail.com) is a librarian, writer, consultant, and frequent conference speaker based in the Washington D.C. metro area.
He earned his MLIS degree from Wayne State University in Detroit.
Price has won several awards including the SLA Innovations in Technology Award and Alumnus of the Year from the Wayne St. University Library and Information Science Program. From 2006-2009 he was Director of Online Information Services at Ask.com.
