Otter.ai is a boon while you’re in meetings or recording audio while you work. The AI tool automatically transcribes everything you’re saying and generates live captions during meetings. You can also connect Otter.ai with popular meeting apps like Zoom or Google Meet.
Before you start to analyze data using AI, take a moment to consider the quality of your input. Because if you feed low-quality data to a machine, you can't expect a high-quality output. That just isn’t how it works.
AI cannot think for itself in the same way humans do. At best, it can learn from everything it has been fed and predict an output. So, make sure your data is premium, representative, and, most importantly, unbiased. Biased data can lead to skewed results and questionable conclusions.
It’s always better to ensure your research complies with ethical standards and you use necessary plagiarism and AI detection tools before submitting your paper. How you write a paper is a reflection of who you are as a professional.
Sometimes, AI systems can generate results that seem plausible but are entirely incorrect or generate complete gibberish. There are also times when an AI might give you the correct answer but fake its sources. This is popularly known as a hallucination.
The academic world has undergone a profound change in the last few years thanks to AI. For some, it’s an invaluable resource from streamlining literature reviews to supercharging data analysis and academic writing. For others, it’s a grey area and presents some real concerns relating to academic integrity and watering down of content.
But the fact remains that AI, in most cases does help researchers around the world become more efficient, thus producing good-quality work in less time. As language models develop more and more, the use of AI for research will become even more prominent.
Be it on genetic research, climate change, or scientific research, UNESCO has delivered global standards to maximize the benefits of the scientific discoveries, while minimizing the downside risks, ensuring they contribute to a more inclusive, sustainable, and peaceful world. It has also identified frontier challenges in areas such as the ethics of neurotechnology, on climate engineering, and the internet of things.
However, these rapid changes also raise profound ethical concerns. These arise from the potential AI systems have to embed biases, contribute to climate degradation, threaten human rights and more. Such risks associated with AI have already begun to compound on top of existing inequalities, resulting in further harm to already marginalised groups.
In no other field is the ethical compass more relevant than in artificial intelligence. These general-purpose technologies are re-shaping the way we work, interact, and live. The world is set to change at a pace not seen since the deployment of the printing press six centuries ago. AI technology brings major benefits in many areas, but without the ethical guardrails, it risks reproducing real world biases and discrimination, fueling divisions and threatening fundamental human rights and freedoms.
However, what makes the Recommendation exceptionally applicable are its extensive Policy Action Areas, which allow policymakers to translate the core values and principles into action with respect to data governance, environment and ecosystems, gender, education and research, and health and social wellbeing, among many other spheres.
The ethical deployment of AI systems depends on their transparency & explainability (T&E). The level of T&E should be appropriate to the context, as there may be tensions between T&E and other principles such as privacy, safety and security.
EIA is a structured process which helps AI project teams, in collaboration with the affected communities, to identify & assess the impacts an AI system may have. It allows to reflect on its potential impact & to identify needed harm prevention actions.
UNESCO's Women4Ethical AI is a new collaborative platform to support governments and companies’ efforts to ensure that women are represented equally in both the design and deployment of AI. The platform’s members will also contribute to the advancement of all the ethical provisions in the Recommendation on the Ethics of AI.
The platform unites 17 leading female experts from academia, civil society, the private sector and regulatory bodies, from around the world. They will share research and contribute to a repository of good practices. The platform will drive progress on non-discriminatory algorithms and data sources, and incentivize girls, women and under-represented groups to participate in AI.
The Council serves as a platform for companies to come together, exchange experiences, and promote ethical practices within the AI industry. By working closely with UNESCO, it aims to ensure that AI is developed and utilized in a manner that respects human rights and upholds ethical standards.
Currently co-chaired by Microsoft and Telefonica, the Council is committed to strengthening technical capacities in ethics and AI, designing and implementing the Ethical Impact Assessment tool mandated by the Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, and contributing to the development of intelligent regional regulations. Through these efforts, it strives to create a competitive environment that benefits all stakeholders and promotes the responsible and ethical use of AI.
If you choose to use generative AI tools for course assignments, academic work, or other forms of published writing, you should give special attention to how you acknowledge and cite the output of those tools in your work. You should always check with your instructor before using AI for coursework.
As with all things related to AI, the norms and conventions for citing AI-generated content are likely to evolve over the next few years. For now, some of the major style guides have released preliminary guidelines. Individual publishers may have their own guidance on citing AI-generated content.
Research EngineDo cite or acknowledge the outputs of generative AI tools when you use them in your work. This includes direct quotations and paraphrasing, as well as using the tool for tasks like editing, translating, idea generation, and data processing.
Be flexible in your approach to citing AI-generated content, because emerging guidelines will always lag behind the current state of technology, and the way that technology is applied. If you are unsure of how to cite something, include a note in your text that describes how you used a certain tool.
When in doubt, remember that we cite sources for two primary purposes: first, to give credit to the author or creator; and second, to help others locate the sources you used in your research. Use these two concepts to help make decisions about using and citing AI-generated content.
When you cite AI-generated content using APA style, you should treat that content as the output of an algorithm, with the author of the content being the company or organization that created the model. For example, when citing ChatGPT, the author would be OpenAI, the company that created ChatGPT.
When referencing shorter passages of text, you can include that text directly in your paper. You might also include an appendix or link to an online supplement that includes the full text of long responses from a generative AI tool.
Chicago style requires that you cite AI-generated content in your work by including either a note or a parenthetical citation, but advises you not to include that source in your bibliography or reference list. The reason given for this is that, because you cannot provide a link to the conversation or session with the AI tool, you should tread that content as you would a phone call or private conversation. However, AI tools are starting to introduce functionality that does allow a user to generate a sharable link to a chat conversation, so this guidance from the Chicago Manual of Style may change.
The MLA views AI-generated content as a source with no author, so you'll use the title of the source in your in-text citations, and in your reference list. The title you choose should be a brief description of the AI-generated content, such as an abbreviated version of the prompt you used.
Authors who use AI tools in the writing of a manuscript, production of images or graphical elements of the paper, or in the collection and analysis of data, must be transparent in disclosing in the Materials and Methods (or similar section) of the paper how the AI tool was used and which tool was used. Authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscript, even those parts produced by an AI tool, and are thus liable for any breach of publication ethics.
The use of AI in the publication process is intended to increase the speed of decision making during the review process and reduce the burden on editors, reviewers, and authors. The adoption of AI raises key ethical issues around accountability, responsibility, and transparency.
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools are evolving incredibly quickly, and they are having a significant impact on education and research. This guide provides information about using generative AI in ethical, creative, and evaluative ways. It focuses on five key areas:
This guide is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0, with the exception of the CLEAR Framework, which was used with permission of Leo S. Lo, and part of the "Evaluating AI Content" page, which was adapted with permission of the University of British Columbia Library.
Territorial Acknowledgement The University of Alberta, its buildings, labs and research stations are primarily located on the territory of the Néhiyaw (Cree), Niitsitapi (Blackfoot), Métis, Nakoda (Stoney), Dene, Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) and Anishinaabe (Ojibway/Saulteaux), lands that are now known as part of Treaties 6, 7 and 8 and homeland of the Métis. The University of Alberta respects the sovereignty, lands, histories, languages, knowledge systems and cultures of all First Nations, Métis and Inuit nations.
Authors are accountable for the originality, validity, and integrity of the content of their submissions. In choosing to use Generative AI tools, journal authors are expected to do so responsibly and in accordance with our journal editorial policies on authorship and principles of publishing ethics and book authors in accordance with our book publishing guidelines. This includes reviewing the outputs of any Generative AI tools and confirming content accuracy.
Authors are responsible for ensuring that the content of their submissions meets the required standards of rigorous scientific and scholarly assessment, research and validation, and is created by the author. Note that some journals may not allow use of Generative AI tools beyond language improvement, therefore authors are advised to consult with the editor of the journal prior to submission.
Generative AI tools must not be listed as an author, because such tools are unable to assume responsibility for the submitted content or manage copyright and licensing agreements. Authorship requires taking accountability for content, consenting to publication via a publishing agreement, and giving contractual assurances about the integrity of the work, among other principles. These are uniquely human responsibilities that cannot be undertaken by Generative AI tools.
Authors must clearly acknowledge within the article or book any use of Generative AI tools through a statement which includes: the full name of the tool used (with version number), how it was used, and the reason for use. For article submissions, this statement must be included in the Methods or Acknowledgments section. Book authors must disclose their intent to employ Generative AI tools at the earliest possible stage to their editorial contacts for approval – either at the proposal phase if known, or if necessary, during the manuscript writing phase. If approved, the book author must then include the statement in the preface or introduction of the book. This level of transparency ensures that editors can assess whether Generative AI tools have been used and whether they have been used responsibly. Taylor & Francis will retain its discretion over publication of the work, to ensure that integrity and guidelines have been upheld.