Ética na comunicação científica: navegando entre princípios e algoritmos.
Saved in:
| Title: | Ética na comunicação científica: navegando entre princípios e algoritmos. |
|---|---|
| Alternate Title: | Ethics in scientific communication: navigating between principles and algorithms. Ética en la comunicación científica: navegando entre principios y algoritmos. |
| Authors: | Lopes, Carlos1,2,3 carloslopes@unb.br, Garcia, Aline Loretto4,5 alinelorettodf@gmail.com, Oliveira Junior, Rodrigo de6,7 rodrigoliveirafeunb@gmail.com, Silva, Rodrigo Mendes da6,8,9 rodrigo.silva@ifb.edu.br |
| Source: | Revista Práxis Educativa. 2025, Vol. 20, p1-13. 13p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Artificial intelligence, *Scientific communication, *Authorship, Ethics, Honesty, Research integrity |
| Abstract (English): | This article analyzes the measures proposed in the 2023 Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) Network Guide for editors, peer reviewers, and authors regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools and resources in scientific communication. It examines the structuring measures outlined in the 2023 SciELO Guide concerning scientific integrity, as well as seeks to identify gaps and emerging challenges. The study adopts a qualitative, exploratory, and descriptive approach. The research methodology was documentary analysis, based on the following analytical dimensions: context of the document; author or authors; authenticity and reliability of the text; nature of the document; key concepts; and internal logic of the text (Cellard, 2008). The results indicate that the structuring measures of the 2023 SciELO Guide for scientific integrity in scientific communication are associated with the following categories: informative, formative, preventive, and orientative, reaffirming the centrality of human authorship, transparency, and traceability in the use of AI. The punitive category is not explicitly presented as part of the measures related to scientific integrity. The study concludes that, although the 2023 SciELO Guide represents an important reference for scientific communication, its preliminary version still presents gaps regarding the definition of acceptable limits for AI use, the clarity of prescribed sanctions, and the absence of specific guidelines on professional training and applicable functionalities, especially in interdisciplinary contexts. The research highlights the need to improve these guidelines and proposes the advancement of research agendas and training policies for these professionals to address the emerging ethical challenges of integrating AI into science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Abstract (Spanish): | Este artículo analiza las medidas propuestas en la Scientific Electronic Library Online - Guía de la Red Biblioteca Electrónica Científica en Línea (SciELO) de 2023 para editores, evaluadores y autores sobre el uso de herramientas y recursos de Inteligencia Artificial (IA) en la comunicación científica. Para ello, se examinan las medidas estructurantes propuestas en la Guía SciELO de 2023 con respecto a la integridad científica, así como se busca identificar vacíos y desafíos emergentes. El estudio sigue un enfoque cualitativo, exploratorio y descriptivo. La metodología de investigación adoptada fue el análisis documental, a partir de las siguientes dimensiones de estudio: contexto del documento; autor o autores; autenticidad y confiabilidad del texto; naturaleza del texto; conceptos clave; y lógica interna del texto (Cellard, 2008). Los resultados indican que las medidas estructurantes de la Guía SciELO de 2023 para la integridad científica en la comunicación científica se asocian con las siguientes categorías: informativa, formativa, preventiva y orientativa, reafirmando la centralidad de la autoría humana, la transparencia y la trazabilidad en el uso de la IA. La categoría punitiva no se presenta de forma explícita como parte de las medidas orientadas a la integridad científica. Se concluye que, aunque la Guía SciELO de 2023 represente una referencia importante para la comunicación científica, la versión preliminar del documento aún presenta vacíos en cuanto a la definición de los límites aceptables del uso de la IA, a la claridad de las sanciones previstas y la ausencia de directrices específicas sobre la formación de profesionales y funcionalidades aplicables, especialmente en contextos interdisciplinarios. La investigación destaca la necesidad de perfeccionamiento de dichas directrices y propone el avance de agendas de investigación y políticas de formación de estos profesionales que contemplen los desafíos éticos emergentes de la integración de la IA en la ciência. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Abstract (Portuguese): | Este artigo analisa as medidas propostas no Guia da Rede Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) de 2023 para editores, pareceristas e autores sobre o uso de ferramentas e recursos de Inteligência Artificial (IA) na comunicação científica. Para isso, examinam-se as medidas estruturadoras propostas no Guia SciELO de 2023 para a integridade científica, bem como se busca identificar lacunas e desafios emergentes. O estudo segue uma abordagem qualitativa, exploratória e descritiva. A metodologia de pesquisa adotada foi a análise documental, a partir das seguintes dimensões de estudo: contexto do documento; autor ou autores; autenticidade e confiabilidade do texto; natureza do texto; conceitos-chave e lógica interna do texto (Cellard, 2008). Os resultados indicam que as medidas estruturadoras do Guia SciELO de 2023 para a integridade científica na comunicação científica se associam às seguintes categorias: informativa, formativa, preventiva e orientativa, reafirmando a centralidade da autoria humana, da transparência e da rastreabilidade no uso de IA. A categoria da punição não é explicitada como parte das medidas voltadas à integridade científica. Conclui-se que, embora o Guia SciELO represente uma referência importante para a comunicação científica, a versão preliminar do documento ainda apresenta lacunas quanto à definição dos limites aceitáveis do uso de IA, à clareza das sanções previstas e à ausência de diretrizes específicas sobre a formação de profissionais e funcionalidades aplicáveis, especialmente em contextos interdisciplinares. A pesquisa destaca a necessidade de aperfeiçoamento dessas diretrizes e propõe o avanço de agendas de pesquisa e políticas de formação desses profissionais que contemplem os desafios éticos emergentes da integração da IA na ciência. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Revista Práxis Educativa is the property of Revista Praxis Educativa and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
| Abstract: | This article analyzes the measures proposed in the 2023 Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) Network Guide for editors, peer reviewers, and authors regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools and resources in scientific communication. It examines the structuring measures outlined in the 2023 SciELO Guide concerning scientific integrity, as well as seeks to identify gaps and emerging challenges. The study adopts a qualitative, exploratory, and descriptive approach. The research methodology was documentary analysis, based on the following analytical dimensions: context of the document; author or authors; authenticity and reliability of the text; nature of the document; key concepts; and internal logic of the text (Cellard, 2008). The results indicate that the structuring measures of the 2023 SciELO Guide for scientific integrity in scientific communication are associated with the following categories: informative, formative, preventive, and orientative, reaffirming the centrality of human authorship, transparency, and traceability in the use of AI. The punitive category is not explicitly presented as part of the measures related to scientific integrity. The study concludes that, although the 2023 SciELO Guide represents an important reference for scientific communication, its preliminary version still presents gaps regarding the definition of acceptable limits for AI use, the clarity of prescribed sanctions, and the absence of specific guidelines on professional training and applicable functionalities, especially in interdisciplinary contexts. The research highlights the need to improve these guidelines and proposes the advancement of research agendas and training policies for these professionals to address the emerging ethical challenges of integrating AI into science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 18094031 |
| DOI: | 10.5212/PraxEduc.v.20.24849.039 |
