Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.11255 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866911003302690816 |
|---|---|
| author | Chakravorti, Tatiana Wang, Xinyu Venkit, Pranav Narayanan Koneru, Sai Munger, Kevin Rajtmajer, Sarah |
| author_facet | Chakravorti, Tatiana Wang, Xinyu Venkit, Pranav Narayanan Koneru, Sai Munger, Kevin Rajtmajer, Sarah |
| contents | The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into social science research practices raises significant technological, methodological, and ethical issues. We present a community-centric study drawing on 284 survey responses and 15 semi-structured interviews with social scientists, describing their familiarity with, perceptions of the usefulness of, and ethical concerns about the use of AI in their field. A crucial innovation in study design is to split our survey sample in half, providing the same questions to each -- but randomizing whether participants were asked about "AI" or "Machine Learning" (ML). We find that the use of AI in research settings has increased significantly among social scientists in step with the widespread popularity of generative AI (genAI). These tools have been used for a range of tasks, from summarizing literature reviews to drafting research papers. Some respondents used these tools out of curiosity but were dissatisfied with the results, while others have now integrated them into their typical workflows. Participants, however, also reported concerns with the use of AI in research contexts. This is a departure from more traditional ML algorithms which they view as statistically grounded. Participants express greater trust in ML, citing its relative transparency compared to black-box genAI systems. Ethical concerns, particularly around automation bias, deskilling, research misconduct, complex interpretability, and representational harm, are raised in relation to genAI. To guide this transition, we offer recommendations for AI developers, researchers, educators, and policymakers focusing on explainability, transparency, ethical safeguards, sustainability, and the integration of lived experiences into AI design and evaluation processes. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2506_11255 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Social Scientists on the Role of AI in Research Chakravorti, Tatiana Wang, Xinyu Venkit, Pranav Narayanan Koneru, Sai Munger, Kevin Rajtmajer, Sarah Computers and Society The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into social science research practices raises significant technological, methodological, and ethical issues. We present a community-centric study drawing on 284 survey responses and 15 semi-structured interviews with social scientists, describing their familiarity with, perceptions of the usefulness of, and ethical concerns about the use of AI in their field. A crucial innovation in study design is to split our survey sample in half, providing the same questions to each -- but randomizing whether participants were asked about "AI" or "Machine Learning" (ML). We find that the use of AI in research settings has increased significantly among social scientists in step with the widespread popularity of generative AI (genAI). These tools have been used for a range of tasks, from summarizing literature reviews to drafting research papers. Some respondents used these tools out of curiosity but were dissatisfied with the results, while others have now integrated them into their typical workflows. Participants, however, also reported concerns with the use of AI in research contexts. This is a departure from more traditional ML algorithms which they view as statistically grounded. Participants express greater trust in ML, citing its relative transparency compared to black-box genAI systems. Ethical concerns, particularly around automation bias, deskilling, research misconduct, complex interpretability, and representational harm, are raised in relation to genAI. To guide this transition, we offer recommendations for AI developers, researchers, educators, and policymakers focusing on explainability, transparency, ethical safeguards, sustainability, and the integration of lived experiences into AI design and evaluation processes. |
| title | Social Scientists on the Role of AI in Research |
| topic | Computers and Society |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.11255 |