Normative Foundations and Ethics of Professional Activity of Scientists in the Context of the Spread of Artificial Intelligence
Digitalization, the expanding applications of artificial intelligence, and the growing accessibility of neural networks are creating new working conditions for scientists. AI can now handle routine tasks traditionally performed by analysts and researchers and even substitute human creativity with machine algorithms to generate texts, concepts, and theories. While this transformation offers new opportunities and advantages, it also introduces risks and threats, reshaping the traditional challenges surrounding the regulatory foundations and ethics of scientific work.
The authors of the study—Antonina Noskova, Natalia Zarubina, and Daria Goloukhova—analyze the results of two sociological surveys conducted in 2023 and 2024 among members of the Russian scientific community. The surveys aimed to identify problem areas in the accumulation of human potential within the Russian scientific community amid the development of digital technologies in general and artificial intelligence in particular.
The study evaluated the speed at which researchers adapt to AI technologies by assessing their proficiency with AI, the diversity of technologies they use, their subjective perceptions of workplace changes influenced by AI, and shifts in research activities driven by these technologies. The findings indicate that scientists are adapting to technological changes relatively quickly. However, AI is already introducing adjustments to their professional activities, which scientists view with mixed sentiments. On one hand, a significant proportion of respondents recognize the positive impact of AI on their work, including improved efficiency in data analysis and processing, reduced time spent on routine tasks through automation, and the emergence of entirely new fields of scientific inquiry. On the other hand, scientists highlight new risks to their professional activities, primarily ethical and humanistic concerns.
There are growing concerns among scientists that the proliferation of AI technologies may exacerbate issues of misconduct within the scientific community. However, there is no consensus yet on the need to regulate AI integration into professional activities. At the same time, there is unanimous agreement that the ethical use of AI should be limited to simplifying routine tasks and should not interfere with the creative process of scientific inquiry.
“Distinguishing imitation from genuine scientific creativity and identifying clear criteria to determine whether a presented scientific result is a product of inspired creative effort or not has become a new challenge for the scientific community in the context of AI’s spread,” notes Natalia Zarubina, one of the study’s authors. She adds: “While it may be acceptable for a teacher to use AI for tasks such as converting a scientific text into a brief educational presentation, it is unacceptable for a scientist to use AI to generate interpretations presented as a contribution to science.”
The reproduction of ethical principles in the professional activities of scientists continues to hold functional importance within the human potential structure of the scientific community.
Human Capital Multidisciplinary Research Center Digest Project is managed by Olga Voron.
The new issue of the research digest (Russian version) is available at the link.
Previous issues are available at the link.