Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Science Editing : Science Editing

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search
Advanced Search
mobile menu button

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Sci Ed > Volume 12(1); 2025 > Article
Meeting Report
 Meeting report on the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) Autumn Symposium 2024
Jun-Beom Parkorcid
Science Editing 2025;12(1):63-65.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.354
Published online: February 6, 2025

Department of Periodontics, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea

Correspondence to Jun-Beom Park jbassoonis@yahoo.co.kr
• Received: December 30, 2024   • Accepted: January 19, 2025

Copyright © 2025 Korean Council of Science Editors

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

prev next
  • 217 Views
  • 13 Download
Full Article

Download PDF Download PDF

  • Meeting: EASE Autumn Symposium 2024

  • Date: November 26, 2024

  • Venue: Zoom

  • Organizer: European Association of Science Editors (EASE)

  • Theme: Artificial intelligence (AI) and digital tools in scholarly publishing

I had the privilege of attending the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) Autumn Symposium 2024 in the late afternoon (local time) on November 26, 2024, where I participated in the first session, titled “Asian Perspectives on AI in Scholarly Publishing.” This satellite session, organized by EASE Korea and EASE Vietnam, explored region-specific applications and ethical challenges of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in scholarly publishing. As an Asian and Korean attendee, I felt immense pride in seeing the Asian perspective represented and was inspired by the distinguished Korean professors who contributed as speakers. Professor Kihong Kim, the president of the Korean Council of Science Editors (KCSE), delivered an insightful presentation on the transformative role of AI in scholarly publishing, emphasizing its rapid adoption and profound impact on the industry. He highlighted key benefits, such as enhanced manuscript validation, improved reviewer selection, automated editing, and more efficient information management. According to Professor Kim, AI has the potential to revolutionize journal evaluation, streamline academic writing, and optimize peer review and research processes, while also enabling knowledge discovery, improving manuscript quality, and reducing time and costs. However, he cautioned against over-reliance on AI, stressing the need for careful and ethical integration to preserve the integrity of scholarly publishing. Professor Cheol-Heui Yun, the vice-president of the KCSE, discussed the transformative potential of generative AI in manuscript preparation, peer review, and editorial processes, while also addressing its ethical and operational risks to scholarly integrity and transparency. Drawing from his experience as an editor in bioethics and humanities, he introduced a preliminary framework for the responsible use of AI, emphasizing the importance of balancing efficiency and quality improvements with risk mitigation. He underscored the need for ethical stewardship and open dialogue within the academic community to responsibly navigate AI’s strengths, limitations, and challenges. Professor Yun’s recommendations provide a valuable guide for ensuring AI enhances, rather than compromises, the integrity of scholarly communication [1]. Professor Andy Nguyen (Oulu University, Finland) concluded the session with a thought-provoking presentation on ethical principles for integrating AI into education. He advocated for a balanced, values-driven approach that aligns with ethical standards and societal values. His framework emphasized human-centered design, robust governance, transparency, accountability, sustainability, privacy protection, security, and inclusiveness, offering a roadmap for responsible AI implementation that fosters trust, equity, and long-term sustainability [2].
Following the satellite session, the symposium transitioned into parallel sessions, requiring attendees to choose which topics to focus on. I selected the session titled “AI and Digital Tools for Authors: Collecting Data, Manuscript Writing, and Text Similarity Check,” which deepened my understanding of AI’s role in academic writing and research. One speaker emphasized the importance of responsible AI usage in manuscript preparation, advising, “use AI to polish your writing, not to generate it.” They highlighted the need to check journal or publisher policies on AI use and to declare any AI involvement during manuscript creation, editing, revision, or even when drafting review rebuttals. Another speaker discussed the utility of AI tools in navigating the ever-expanding body of academic literature. While acknowledging the value of AI as an assistive tool, they cautioned researchers to critically evaluate its outputs and avoid treating them as definitive solutions. A third perspective addressed the disruptive potential of conversational AI technologies, which are here to stay and expected to improve with further development. The speaker argued against banning or ignoring AI, emphasizing its ability to handle repetitive tasks and increase efficiency. For instance, in medicine, optimized chatbots could dramatically streamline processes such as literature searches. However, they warned against being overly captivated by AI’s capabilities, advocating for a cautious and deliberate integration of AI into workflows. They stressed the importance of fostering open, critical dialogue about AI’s risks and benefits to ensure its ethical and effective application in academic and professional fields. This session offered a balanced view of AI’s transformative potential, encouraging thoughtful implementation and mindful usage to harness its strengths while addressing its limitations.
A session titled “Recognizing the Value of Manuscript Editors” examined the evolving role of editors in the age of AI, posing the critical question: “does AI signal the end for editors?” Speakers emphasized that AI should not replace editors but rather empower them, suggesting that it be viewed as a tool to enhance, not undermine, their expertise. By integrating AI into editorial workflows, editors can improve efficiency and precision while maintaining their essential role in oversight. While AI can assist with initial drafts and corrections, post-editing by human editors remains crucial to ensure contextual accuracy, tone, and coherence. The session also highlighted the importance of editors acquiring skills to effectively leverage AI, using it as a complementary asset rather than viewing it as a competitor. It concluded with a call to action for editors to lead the integration of AI into their profession, with the goal of utilizing AI as a valuable tool for upholding the quality and integrity of scholarly publications.
A session titled “AI: Tool or Author?” featured a dynamic discussion between two speakers with differing perspectives, offering a balanced exchange of ideas. One speaker adopted a more permissive view of generative AI, emphasizing its diverse applications and current utility across various domains. In contrast, the other speaker recognized the potential of generative AI but focused on its limitations, pointing out that while it excels at summarizing results, it often struggles with more complex tasks such as contributing to discussions or performing critical analysis. The dialogue was particularly commendable for its respectful tone, with both speakers valuing and acknowledging each other’s viewpoints while effectively articulating their own positions. This exchange not only enriched the session but also exemplified the importance of constructive dialogue in addressing the complexities of emerging technologies like generative AI.
The session titled “Three Must-Use AI Tools for Manuscript Editors to Supercharge Their Work” offered comprehensive insights into the effective application of AI across various editorial tasks, such as literature review, extracting answers from literature, language editing, and data analysis. The presentation further discussed how publishers and funders are managing the use of AI tools in research papers. They categorize their management strategies into three primary approaches: the prohibitive approach, which limits the use of AI; the encouragement approach, which supports its integration; and the declaration approach, which mandates the transparent disclosure of AI involvement. The session highlighted AI’s potential to significantly improve editorial workflows by speeding up processes and cutting costs by as much as 50%, showcasing its transformative effect on the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of scholarly publishing.
A session titled “Journal Selection: How AI Can Help Authors and Editors” provided a comprehensive discussion on the evolving role of AI in enhancing journal selection processes. One speaker emphasized that traditional methods of journal selection could be significantly improved through AIsupported, data-driven approaches. They highlighted the importance of minimizing biases and ensuring equitable access as AI tools continue to evolve. They argued that by integrating AI insights with human expertise, the journal selection process becomes more refined and informed. Another speaker raised concerns about privacy and the ethical implications of using AI tools. They cautioned that any data uploaded to an AI tool could potentially become part of its training corpus or be misused. They also questioned whether AI should ever advise against submitting to certain journals, emphasizing that the ultimate responsibility for journal selection rests with humans. The session also addressed author behavior, noting idiosyncratic tendencies such as prioritizing high-impact journals regardless of recommendations, opting for “safe” journals, or considering personal relationships with journal editors or professional societies. The final speaker explored how machine learning algorithms and other digital tools can assist with journal selection. They pointed out that while algorithms are beneficial, they are limited to the journals they are trained on and can be optimized beyond simple “match” scores to facilitate success for researchers. Additionally, researchers can leverage supplementary signals and services offered by digital tools to further refine their decisions. Overall, the session underscored the potential of AI to augment the journal selection process while emphasizing the importance of human oversight, ethical considerations, and addressing behavioral nuances to maximize its benefits.
This symposium highlighted the pervasive integration of AI into our daily lives, particularly from the perspectives of editors, authors, and reviewers who are actively utilizing its capabilities. I found it invaluable to hear diverse viewpoints on AI from researchers, editors, and publishers. These perspectives broadened my understanding of its implications in scholarly publishing. Personally, this experience underscored the need for me to further study and deepen my knowledge of AI, as well as to develop a well-informed, independent perspective on its role. The ability to participate remotely via Zoom (Zoom Communications) was greatly appreciated, allowing me to engage meaningfully despite geographical distance. One of the most commendable aspects of this meeting was the provision of presentation materials and access to recorded sessions. These resources enhanced the overall learning experience and allowed me to revisit the content at my convenience, facilitating a deeper understanding and continued engagement with the topics discussed. I extend my sincere gratitude to everyone involved in organizing this outstanding conference and for providing me with the opportunity to be part of such an enriching experience.

Conflict of Interest

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Funding

The registration fee for the event was generously supported by the Korean Council of Science Editors (KCSE).

Data Availability

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.

The author did not provide any supplementary materials for this article.

Figure & Data

References

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  

      Related articles
      Meeting report on the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) Autumn Symposium 2024
      Meeting report on the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) Autumn Symposium 2024
      Science Editing : Science Editing
      © Korean Council of Science Editors.
      TOP