Capability and readiness of artificial intelligence for research funding organisations: A scoping review
Capability and readiness of artificial intelligence for research funding organisations: A scoping review
Background: over the last decade, we have seen artificial intelligence being increasingly used in both public and private sectors. However, to understand the potential of AI for facilitating organisational processes, innovation, competitiveness and operational efficiency, there needs to be greater understanding of what AI is and what it isn’t, the utilities and considerations, and the potential avenues for AI implementation. This is particularly relevant for research funding organisations due to concerns regarding readiness, ethics and governance, and the ability of AI to reduce administrative burden and research bureaucracy.
Aims: to review and summarise the available evidence about the potential use, utility and considerations of AI use, capability and implementation to address the following question: What does the evidence say about the use of AI (e.g., in use and in development) and what AI tools are available that could inform funders’ processes?
Methods: a scoping review was undertaken with no study or language limits, and included literature not limited to any sector or academic discipline. Records were limited to the last three years (2022-2024) and included grey literature. Two academic databases, Web of Science and ProQuest, were searched, along with three grey literature sources: Google Scholar, Overton, and Business Source Complete in February 2024. A review of the web content of funding organisations was also conducted. Extraction, collation and summary of the evidence was carried out using a framework focusing on the utility and potential of AI and considerations and risks associated to the application of AI.
Preliminary Results: the findings of the review will be presented, highlighting the utility and potential benefits of AI, considerations and risks, and reflection on the ‘AI readiness’ of research funders. Other AI themes (e.g., governance, ethics, security) identified from the literature will also be addressed to understand the application and use of AI.
Value/Impact: the review will provide greater understanding of the use, appropriateness and acceptability of AI for research management practices and consider what processes and functions could be enhanced through the use of AI (where AI could add most benefit and where is it most needed for funding organisations). Although AI could offer insights to reduce the data management burden there also needs to be careful consideration of when, and in what circumstances, it may not be appropriate to implement AI.
Blatch-Jones, Amanda Jane
6bb7aa9c-776b-4bdd-be4e-cf67abd05652
16 May 2024
Blatch-Jones, Amanda Jane
6bb7aa9c-776b-4bdd-be4e-cf67abd05652
Blatch-Jones, Amanda Jane
(2024)
Capability and readiness of artificial intelligence for research funding organisations: A scoping review.
Research on Research Registry and Hub.
Record type:
Conference or Workshop Item
(Paper)
Abstract
Background: over the last decade, we have seen artificial intelligence being increasingly used in both public and private sectors. However, to understand the potential of AI for facilitating organisational processes, innovation, competitiveness and operational efficiency, there needs to be greater understanding of what AI is and what it isn’t, the utilities and considerations, and the potential avenues for AI implementation. This is particularly relevant for research funding organisations due to concerns regarding readiness, ethics and governance, and the ability of AI to reduce administrative burden and research bureaucracy.
Aims: to review and summarise the available evidence about the potential use, utility and considerations of AI use, capability and implementation to address the following question: What does the evidence say about the use of AI (e.g., in use and in development) and what AI tools are available that could inform funders’ processes?
Methods: a scoping review was undertaken with no study or language limits, and included literature not limited to any sector or academic discipline. Records were limited to the last three years (2022-2024) and included grey literature. Two academic databases, Web of Science and ProQuest, were searched, along with three grey literature sources: Google Scholar, Overton, and Business Source Complete in February 2024. A review of the web content of funding organisations was also conducted. Extraction, collation and summary of the evidence was carried out using a framework focusing on the utility and potential of AI and considerations and risks associated to the application of AI.
Preliminary Results: the findings of the review will be presented, highlighting the utility and potential benefits of AI, considerations and risks, and reflection on the ‘AI readiness’ of research funders. Other AI themes (e.g., governance, ethics, security) identified from the literature will also be addressed to understand the application and use of AI.
Value/Impact: the review will provide greater understanding of the use, appropriateness and acceptability of AI for research management practices and consider what processes and functions could be enhanced through the use of AI (where AI could add most benefit and where is it most needed for funding organisations). Although AI could offer insights to reduce the data management burden there also needs to be careful consideration of when, and in what circumstances, it may not be appropriate to implement AI.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: 16 May 2024
Venue - Dates:
Research on Research Registry and Hub, 2024-05-16
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 491352
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/491352
PURE UUID: 987b93d4-0ed3-4ff8-a3af-efbdb84feb91
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 20 Jun 2024 16:47
Last modified: 21 Jun 2024 01:38
Export record
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics