Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study investigates how scientists, educators, and ethics committee members in Türkiye perceive the opportunities and risks posed by generative AI and the ethical implications for science and education. This study uses a 22-question survey developed by the EOSC-Future and RDA AIDV Working Group. The responses were gathered from 62 universities across 208 universities in Türkiye, with a completion rate of 98.4%. By capturing the diverse perspectives of key academic stakeholders, this study makes three significant contributions to the academic literature: 1) the responsible utilization of technologies such as generative AI depends not only on technological capabilities but also on the ethical conscientiousness of scientists. 2) it is crucial to use generative AI tools with critical human oversight to maintain scientific integrity. 3) Promoting a culture of ethical scholarly practice necessitates the standardization of responsible conduct of research and its integration into the training of scientists.

Keywords

Generative AI scientific research higher education meaningful human oversight ethical conscientiousness survey

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alahdab,

Fares. (2024)

Potential impact of large language models on academic writing. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, 29(3), 201–202.

Aravazhi

P. S.

Gunasekaran

Benjamin

N. Z. Y.

Thai

Chandrasekar

K. K.

Kolanu

N. D.

Prajjwal

Tekuru

Brito

L. V.

Inban

(2025). The integration of artificial intelligence into clinical medicine: Trends, challenges, and future directions. Disease-a-Month, 25, 101882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disamonth.2025.101882. Epub ahead of print

Bakiner

Onur

(2023). What do academics say about artificial intelligence ethics? An overview of the scholarship. AI Ethics, 3(2), 513–525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-022-00182-4

Bastani

Sungu

Kabakcı

Mariman

(2024). Generative AI Can Harm Learning. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4895486

Bolayır

M. A.

(2024). Yapay Zeka, İnsan Hakları ve İnsan Haklarının Korunması Açısından Yapay Zekanın Denetimi . TIDE AcademIA Research, 5(2), 117–145.

Chen

Esmaeilzadeh

(2024). Generative AI in medical practice: In-depth exploration of privacy and security challenges. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 26(1), e53008. https://doi.org/10.2196/53008

Christoforaki

Beyan

(2022). Ai ethics—A bird’s eye view. Applied Sciences, 12(9), 4130. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12094130

Dwivedi

Y. K.

Kshetri

Hughes

Slade

E. L.

Jeyaraj

Kar

A. K.

Abdullah

M. B.

Alex

Vishnupriya

R. j.

Manju

Hanaa

Mousa

A. A.

Adil

S. A. B.

Janarthanan

Yves

Sriparna

Indranil

Laurence

Dimitrios

Ryan

(2023). Opinion paper: “so what if ChatGPT wrote it?” multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71(1), 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642

Else

(2023). Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists. Nature, 613, 423. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00056-7

10.

Eti

H. S.

(2025). Yükseköğretimde yapay zekâ: Öğrenci tutumları ve akademisyen görüşleri. İktisadi İdari Ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 10(26), 132–153. https://doi.org/10.25204/iktisad.1588001

11.

European Commission (EC) . (June, 2023). Quarterly R&I literature review 2023/Q2. The impact of AI on R&I.ec_rtd_quarterly-ri-review_022023.pdf.

12.

European Research Council . (2023). Foresight: Use and impact of Artificial Intelligence in the scientific process .

13.

European Union . (2018). General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). https://gdpr-info.eu/.

14.

European Union (EU) . (2024). Artificial Intelligence Act. Recital 27. https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/recital/27/.

15.

Fardim

Gonçalves

Tribst

(2023). Scientific writing with artificial intelligence: Key considerations and alerts. Brazilian Dental Science, 26(3), e3988. https://doi.org/10.4322/bds.2023.e3988

16.

Gao

C. A.

Howard

F. M.

Markov

N. S.

, et al. (2023). Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers. npj Digital Medicine, 6(75), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-023-00819-6

17.

Grimaldi

Ehrler

(2023). Ai et al.: Machines are about to change scientific publishing forever. ACS Energy Letters, 8(1), 878–880. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsenergylett.2c02828

18.

Gül Ünlü

Küçükşabanoğlu

(2023). Dezenformasyon ve yapay zekâ: Dezenformasyonla mücadele yollarına yapay zekâ uzmanlarının gözünden bakmak. İletişim Ve Diplomasi, (11), 83–106. https://doi.org/10.54722/iletisimvediplomasi.1375478

19.

Harrer

(2023). Attention is not all you need: The complicated case of ethically using large language models in healthcare and medicine. The Lancet, 90(1), 104512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2023.104512

20.

Hosseini

Gao

C. A.

Liebovitz

D. M.

Carvalho

A. M.

Ahmad

F. S.

Luo

Ngan

Kristi

Abel

(2023). An exploratory survey about using ChatGPT in education, healthcare, and research. PLoS ONE, 18(10), e0292216. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0292216

21.

Hovy

Prabhumoye

(2021). Five sources of bias in natural language processing. Language and Linguistics Compass, 15(8), e12432. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12432

22.

Jeon, J., Kim, L., & Park, J. (2025). The ethics of generative AI in socialscience research: A qualitative approach for institutionally grounded AIresearch ethics. Technology in Society, 81, 102836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.102836

23.

Khatri

Karki

(2023). Artificial intelligence (ai) in higher education: Growing academic integrity and ethical concerns. Nepalese Journal of Development and Rural Studies, 20(01), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3126/njdrs.v20i01.64134

24.

Krakowski

(2025). Human-AI agency in the age of generative AI. Information and Organization, 35(1), 100560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2025.100560

25.

Lan

Feng

Song

Xiao

(2025). Integrating ethical knowledge in generative AI education: Constructing the GenAI-TPACK framework for university teachers’ professional development. Education and Information Technologies : The Official Journal of the IFIP Technical Committee on Education, 30(11), 15621–15644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13427-6

26.

Lee

J. Y.

(2023). Can an artificial intelligence chatbot be the author of a scholarly article? Science Editing, 10(1), 7–12. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.292

27.

Manning

A. J.

(September 5, 2024). Professor tailored AI tutor to physics course. Engagement doubled. Harvard Gazette.

28.

Mehta

Zimba

Gasparyan

A. Y.

Seiil

Yessirkepov

(2023). Ethics committees: Structure, roles, and issues. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 38(25), e198. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e198

29.

Mulligan

(April 20, 2022). Research futures report 2.0. ELSEVIER. The future of research revealed.

30.

Murphy

Di Ruggiero

Upshur

Willison

D. J.

Malhotra

Cai

J. C.

Malhotra

Lui

Gibson

(2021). Artificial intelligence for good health: A scoping review of the ethics literature. BMC Med Ethics., 22(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00577-8

31.

Nickel

P. J.

(2024). The prospect of artificial intelligence-supported ethics review. Ethics Hum Res, 46(6), 25–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/eahr.500230. PMID: 39536154

32.

Ning

Teixayavong

Shang

Savulescu

Nagaraj

Miao

Mertens

Ting

D. S. W.

Ong

J. C. L.

Liu

Cao

Dunn

Vaughan

Ong

M. E. H.

Sung

J. J.

Topol

E. J.

Liu

(2024). Generative artificial intelligence and ethical considerations in health care: A scoping review and ethics checklist. Lancet Digit Health, 6(11), e848–e856. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(24)00143-2

33.

Obrenovic

Wang

, et al. (2024). Generative AI and human–robot interaction: Implications and future agenda for business, society and ethics. AI & Society, 40(2), https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-01889-0

34.

Padakanti

Kalva

Kommidi

(2024). Ai in scientific research: Empowering researchers with intelligent tools. International Journal of Scientific Research in Computer Science, Engineering and Information Technology, 10(5), 416–422. https://doi.org/10.32628/cseit241051012

35.

Powers

(2023). Generative ai meets scientific publishing. Optics and Photonics News, 34(10), 26. https://doi.org/10.1364/opn.34.10.000026

36.

Qadhi

S. M.

Alduais

Chaaban

Khraisheh

(2024). Generative AI, research ethics, and higher education research: Insights from a scientometric analysis. Information, 15(6), 325. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15060325

37.

Ravšelj

Keržič

Tomaževič

Umek

Brezovar

Iahad

Aristovnik

(2025). Higher education students’ perceptions of ChatGPT: A global study of early reactions. Plos One, 20(2), e0315011. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0315011

38.

Rentier

E. S.

(2024). To use or not to use: Exploring the ethical implications of using generative AI in academic writing. AI Ethics, 5(3), https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00649-6

39.

Resnik

D. B.

Hosseini

(2025). The ethics of using artificial intelligence in scientific research: New guidance needed for a new tool. AI Ethics, 5(-), 1499–1521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00493-8

40.

Rousseau

Yang

Bollen

Shen

(2023). Large language models and scientific publishing. Journal of Data and Information Science, 8(1), 1–1. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2023-0007

41.

Serpa

Wang

Zhou

Keleş

(2024). Artificial intelligence as author of scientific publications. Science Insights, 44(1), 1215–1219. https://doi.org/10.15354/si.24.re866

42.

Stokel-Walker

Noorden

(2023). What ChatGPT and generative ai mean for science. Nature, 614(7947), 214–216. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00340-6

43.

Tarsney

(2025). Deception and manipulation in generative AI. Philosophical Studies : An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, 182(-), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-024-02259-8

44.

Tasioulas

Green

(2023). ‘The EU’s AI Act at a Crossroad for Rights,’ AI Ethics at Oxford Blog.https://www.oxfordaiethics.ox.ac.uk/eus-ai-act-crossroads-rights.

45.

Ünal

Yıldırım

(2024). Türkiye’deki akademisyenlerin yapay zekâ (YZ) uygulama ve araçlarını kullanımları hakkında bir araştırma. Sinop Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 9(1), 128–144. https://doi.org/10.33484/sinopfbd.1434171

46.

UNESCO guidance on GenAI use in education and research . https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/guidance-generative-ai-education-and-research .

47.

Vallor

(2024). The AI mirror: How to reclaim our humanity in an age of machine thinking. Oxford University Press.

48.

Van Noorden

Perkel

J. M.

(September 27, 2023). AI And science: What 1,600 researchers think. Nature, 621(News Feature), 672–675. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-02980-0

49.

(2025). Ai for science: A comprehensive review on innovations, challenges, and future directions. IJAI4S, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.63619/ijais.v1i1.002

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.11 MB