Comparing ChatGPT and human expertise: exploring new avenues in peer review of single-case experimental research.
Saved in:
| Title: | Comparing ChatGPT and human expertise: exploring new avenues in peer review of single-case experimental research. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Rakap, Salih1 (AUTHOR) srakaptr@gmail.com, Balikci, Serife2 (AUTHOR), Gulboy, Emrah3 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | European Journal of Special Needs Education. Oct2025, Vol. 40 Issue 5, p832-833. 2p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Artificial intelligence, *Professional peer review, *Expertise, ChatGPT |
| Abstract: | The article discusses the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in the peer review process, emphasizing that AI, including tools like ChatGPT, cannot fully replace human reviewers. The authors acknowledge the insights from various scholars who highlight both the potential benefits and risks of AI in peer review, such as compromised confidentiality and the risk of standardization stifling originality. They advocate for the responsible use of AI as a tool to alleviate reviewer workload while maintaining the essential human elements of empathy and nuanced feedback. The authors call for clear guidelines on ethical AI use in peer review and stress the importance of ongoing dialogue to navigate this evolving landscape. [Extracted from the article] |
| Copyright of European Journal of Special Needs Education is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd 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 |
Be the first to leave a comment!
