Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/277753 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2023
Schriftenreihe/Nr.: 
Diskussionsbeitrag No. 2302
Verlag: 
Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Department für Agrarökonomie und Rurale Entwicklung (DARE), Göttingen
Zusammenfassung: 
The scientific production system is of ultimate importance for the way how humans address global challenges. Recently, scholars have begun to voice concerns about structural inefficiencies within this system, as e.g. the replication crisis, the p-value debate or the identification of various forms of publication bias have brought up. Most suggested remedies tend to address only partial aspects of the system's inefficiencies, while no unifying agenda towards an overall transformation of the system has yet emerged. We argue that a unifying agenda is even more urgently needed in light of Artificial intelligence (AI) that is arising as a tool for scientific writing services. Without appropriate reactions from the Q science community, this trend may even exponentiate present credibility problems due to limited replicability and ritual-based statistical practice, while amplifying all forms of already existing biases. Our review of these developments suggests that näive openness in the science system alone will unlikely lead to major efficiency gains. We contribute by identifying key elements for the definition of transformation pathways towards open, democratic and conscious learning, teaching, reviewing and publishing that will be supported by openly maintained AI tools. As part of this transition, roles and incentives for reviewers will have to gain in relation to authors: Future Q scientists will have to write less, learn differently and review more.
Dokumentart: 
Working Paper

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
961.06 kB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.