AI has become an integral part of how research is shared and improved—supporting everything from editorial workflows to personalized discovery. It supports:
Such integration enables better access to knowledge and streamlines the dissemination of trustworthy research. (Source: AI Ethics in Scholarly Communication).
The role of AI in peer review is at the center of an active and rapidly evolving debate. Perspectives are shifting, and the following resources offer valuable insights to help navigate this critical conversation.
Our members have long pioneered the responsible use of AI, applying it to content creation, workflow optimization, and the development of innovative tools.
To fulfill its promise, AI must be used responsibly and in alignment with the ethos of science. STM advocates for:
Source: AI Ethics In Scholarly Communication
Also reference: Recommendations for a Classification of AI Use in Academic Manuscript Preparation
Academic publishers are compiling guidelines for their authors providing guidance on correct and transparent use of AI in preparing manuscripts for publication. Reference: Policies on artificial intelligence chatbots among academic publishers: a cross-sectional audit | Feb 2025, Springer
Despite all the potential gains, AI could also negatively affect knowledge production and dissemination in the research ecosystem if not handled carefully – and exacerbate an already pervasive blur between fact and fiction.
AI’s capabilities can amplify misinformation, especially when used without proper guardrails. The “hallucination” problem—where AI generates false or misleading content—poses a threat to scientific credibility and public trust.
Much like the spread of fake news through social media, scientific misinformation could erode societal trust in research and decision-making. Responsible stewardship is vital to counter these risks.
Society and policy-makers need to be able to trust scientific information to make evidence-based decisions, and researchers need to be able to drive innovation and discoveries that are so central to competitiveness and other societal benefits.
Recognizing the dual nature of AI, STM is leading initiatives that use AI to protect research integrity. The STM Integrity Hub exemplifies this approach, offering:
This balanced approach ensures AI supports—not replaces—the essential work of human reviewers and editors.
STM has expressed support for Congressional efforts to legislate on AI transparency, with several bills proposed to require AI developers to disclose the use of copyrighted material. The TRAIN Act grants rightsholders the ability to petition courts to subpoena developers to release generative AI training data. The CLEAR Act would require generative AI developers to disclose, available via a…
Transparency about the use of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in research articles and other scholarly outputs is an important aspect of research integrity. At present, practices for how to disclose AI use vary widely across disciplines, regions, and publication cultures. To address this issue, STM has released a report “Recommendations for a Classification of AI…
In an article on growing threats to research integrity, Times Higher Education covers STM’s report Safeguarding Scholarly Communication: Publisher Practices to Uphold Research Integrity. The article describes how publishers are increasingly focused on identifying integrity issues before publication—responding to paper mills, AI-enabled fabrication, and coordinated fraud networks—while scaling up research integrity teams and collaborating on…
STM has endorsed an amicus curiae brief filed by the Copyright Alliance in the ongoing U.S. appeals case Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence. The case raises important questions about copyright protection for editorial content — including material similar in nature and function to content produced by STM’s members. The case also presents a set of facts under which the lower court rightly found ROSS’s…