Gatekeeping in the age of generative AI

Twenty years after open access transformed scholarly publishing, another game-changer in the form of generative AI emerged, bringing with it significant implications for the quality of the scholarly record. The peer-review system, which has long been the most important gatekeeping and evaluation mechanism used by publishers, is challenged by reviewer fatigue and shortages and now faces additional pressure from AI-enabled research integrity violations and AI-generated peer reviews. Drawing on data from 47 qualitative interviews conducted with publishers and publishing-adjacent stakeholders, this poster presents insights into how AI has affected editorial quality mechanisms across the industry. In this context, academic publishers are split into two groups: Smaller- and mid-sized presses that mainly rely on peer review for quality control as AI tools are lacking. Large publishing houses that supplement peer review with AI-powered software to help identify and address research integrity issues stemming from AI (ab)use. For publishers, access to AI-detection tools – or the lack thereof – will have long-term effects on the quality of the scholarly record, which may also impact the academic publishing ecosystem in the future. The two-pronged discussion question becomes: what does review-based gatekeeping look like in the age of AI, and how can all publishers, together with the scholarly community, ensure that the quality of their publications is preserved?

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-09-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21699552
Primary Topic
Academic Publishing and Open Access
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Gatekeeping in the age of generative AI

Isabella Peters, Niels Taubert, Catherine Ann Marshall
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Academic Publishing and Open Access
article

Gatekeeping in the age of generative AI

Isabella Peters, Niels Taubert, Catherine Ann Marshall
article en

Abstract

Twenty years after open access transformed scholarly publishing, another game-changer in the form of generative AI emerged, bringing with it significant implications for the quality of the scholarly record. The peer-review system, which has long been the most important gatekeeping and evaluation mechanism used by publishers, is challenged by reviewer fatigue and shortages and now faces additional pressure from AI-enabled research integrity violations and AI-generated peer reviews. Drawing on data from 47 qualitative interviews conducted with publishers and publishing-adjacent stakeholders, this poster presents insights into how AI has affected editorial quality mechanisms across the industry. In this context, academic publishers are split into two groups: Smaller- and mid-sized presses that mainly rely on peer review for quality control as AI tools are lacking. Large publishing houses that supplement peer review with AI-powered software to help identify and address research integrity issues stemming from AI (ab)use. For publishers, access to AI-detection tools – or the lack thereof – will have long-term effects on the quality of the scholarly record, which may also impact the academic publishing ecosystem in the future. The two-pronged discussion question becomes: what does review-based gatekeeping look like in the age of AI, and how can all publishers, together with the scholarly community, ensure that the quality of their publications is preserved?

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Bielefeld University (DE), ZBW – Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft (DE)
Volkswagen Foundation
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Academic Publishing and Open Access
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.