The Reviewer’s Dilemma: Is Avoiding AI in Peer Review Still Realistic?

By Jordan Hildebrand

Introduction: The Mass Outbreak of AI and Its National Inclusion

In the coming of AI, it has been put at the foreground of so much research and discovery thus far in the 21^st century. Since it’s mass outbreak, there have been many positive and many negative revelations regarding AI. However, one area that has not been focused on quite yet is the effect on the publication and academic research industry.

Many scholars all over the world are using AI to accelerate their research and are beginning to realize just how effective a tool it can be when used correctly. But just because it is decreasing research times does not mean the method of its deployment is 100% perfect.

AI still has a tendency to hallucinate, misattribute, or fail to attribute entirely, which can cause ethical issues later down the road. At the same time, it has majorly impacted the realm of publication. Editors may use AI for various reasons, with proofreading/revisions being the most important one.

However, what impact does AI have on the peer review process of being an editor and author, and does that impact carry consequences for usage? Are authors getting the necessary feedback from their peers? Are those reviews ethically sound, and contextually accurate? These are all questions that IGI Global Scientific Publishing answered in their Free On-Demand Virtual Event for Peer Review Week 2026: Can Reviewers Realistically Avoid the Use of AI in Peer Review?

Is AI in the Peer Review Process Really Avoidable?

Some argue that the use of AI in the peer review process degrades the quality of the reviews or makes them inauthentic. It may also be disrespectful to the authors who took the time to put the work into their chapters to make meaningful contributions to their field of study. These are only some of the points that present contention when delving into the use of AI in the peer review process.

By having a panel full of experts in the field of research integrity, the insights derived from this webinar will lead us on the right track as publishers for how to view AI in the peer review process, and more so how to handle AI in the editorial process as a whole.

On the panel was Howard Bauchner, a Professor of Pediatrics and Public Health at Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Tim Kersjes, Head of Research Integrity Resolutions at Springer Nature Research Integrity Group, Elena Vicario, Director of Research Integrity at Frontiers Publishing, and Zeger Karssen, Founder & CEO of World Brain Scholar.

In order to create and publish high-quality research, peer reviewers need to give high-quality feedback. If the authors cannot even trust the feedback they are being given, this could damage the manuscript’s integrity, as well as the integrity of the book as a whole. Discovering positive angles to the inclusion of AI in the peer review process takes precedence, as the mass spreading of AI continues to flood all technical fields all over the world.

As a publisher at the foreground of the AI revolution, with a good portion of our work having a heavy focus on the changes that AI has brought about, this is the perfect time to discuss where AI’s impact and value must be heavily reassessed.

Conclusion: Peer Review Week 2026 Sets the Tone for AI’s Involvement in the Publishing Industry

This webinar was made to accommodate the Peer Review Week theme: “Peer Review Capacity: Volume, Speed, and Quality.” Rather than just give us AI, the webinar explored the complex topic, and attempted to find a way that AI can actually support the peer review process, instead of hindering it. It also attempted to hit the goal of answering the question: if publishers were to lift existing restrictions on AI use in peer review, what new policies, safeguards, and best practices must be enacted, and which applications should be considered acceptable?

At the head of this webinar was IGI Global Scientific Publishing’s Vice President of Publishing Ethics & Research Integrity, Melissa Wagner, discussing the leverages of this technology, as well as the shortcomings. With her ethics and integrity experience, her ideas reached far and showed us that there are still ways that we are learning how to use AI effectively, and also ethically.

Should anyone have any kinds of questions, or if anyone is interested in exploring the role of AI in advancing the quality and speed of the peer review process, then please feel free to watch this Free On-Demand Virtual Event for the full experience.