Dadkhah M, Oermann MH, Hegedüs M, Raman R, Dávid LD. Diagnosis Unreliability of ChatGPT for Journal Evaluation.
Adv Pharm Bull 2024;
14:1-4. [PMID:
38585462 PMCID:
PMC10997925 DOI:
10.34172/apb.2024.020]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2023] [Accepted: 10/10/2023] [Indexed: 04/09/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose
Academic and other researchers have limited tools with which to address the current proliferation of predatory and hijacked journals. These journals can have negative effects on science, research funding, and the dissemination of information. As most predatory and hijacked journals are not error free, this study used ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence (AI) technology tool, to conduct an evaluation of journal quality.
Methods
Predatory and hijacked journals were analyzed for reliability using ChatGPT, and the reliability of result have been discussed.
Results
It shows that ChatGPT is an unreliable tool for journal quality evaluation for both hijacked and predatory journals.
Conclusion
To show how to address this gap, an early trial version of Journal Checker Chatbot has been developed and is discussed as an alternative chatbot that can assist researchers in detecting hijacked journals.
Collapse