What would you feel if a robot performed actions on your behalf? The case of Artificial Intelligence Review Assistant (AIRA) and the cobotization of the peer-review process

• Autor(a) principal: Martinovich, Viviana
• Data de Publicação: 2023
• Outros Autores: Drucaroff, Lucas
• Tipo de documento: preprint
• Idioma: spa
• Título da fonte: SciELO Preprints
• Texto Completo: https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/7326
• topic: Scientific Journals; Peer Review; Publishing Industry; Artificial Intelligence; Revistas Científicas; Revisión por Pares; Industria Editorial; Inteligencia Artificial

The aim of this article is to analyze the experience of interaction between individuals and collaborative robots or "cobots" introduced in the context of the shift from relational and artisanal peer-review processes to large-scale AI-based industrial processes. Additionally, we seeks to uncover signs of potential algorithmic and human biases within this interaction. To achieve this, we chronologically describe a case of interaction with the Artificial Intelligence Review Assistant (AIRA) developed by the publisher Frontiers. Our analysis is rooted in the Habermasian notion of the technification of the life-world and a set of biases (algorithmic bias, automation bias, and confirmation bias). The person-cobot interaction leads to a process of "cobotization" of peer-review, wherein the technification of communicative actions tends to disrupt the agreements and consensus on which the scientific community’s relational ecosystem for research and publication are based; additionally, it has the potential to reinforce algorithmic and human biases. All of the aforementioned calls for a more reflective attitude towards the use of these technologies.