Long before AI accelerated the ways in which academic fraud can be committed at a breathtaking scale, publishers have been navigating evolving integrity practices. Over the last decade, publishers have invested heavily to identify and address manipulation of the publication process, adding dedicated roles, tools, pre-publication screening, audits of journals and researcher networks, and cross-publisher collaboration. These tasks increasingly rely on specialist expertise which often sits outside traditional editorial structures as investigations become more expansive, the scale of publishing ramps up and ensuring integrity across phases of research and publishing has no “owner.” Where is the line between ensuring publishing quality and responsibility for integrity?
In this moderated fireside chat with multi-stakeholder experts in the trenches, de-identified use cases will frame the discussion around what resources can be used now -and in the near future- to prevent, investigate and and remediate possible research integrity issues across research and publishing workflows. The session will do some expectation-setting for what integrity efforts up against and how we need to work together on supporting them and related confidentiality. How do we use the tool of community to determine parameters across disciplines in the age of AI? How much self-citation is too much? When do instances of concern become a pattern? How far back should a practice that is now considered manipulative, e.g., marking an image in certain ways, be considered a problem when it was once considered useful?
Making the process fairer and more effective for all of us at a time when research and scholarship is under so much scrutiny will be discussed with the panel and the audience, who are encouraged to participate through Q&A as well as anonymously through live polling.
