IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v81y2025ics0160791x25000260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The ethics of generative AI in social science research: A qualitative approach for institutionally grounded AI research ethics

Author

Listed:
  • Jeon, June
  • Kim, Lanu
  • Park, Jaehyuk

Abstract

Despite growing attention to the ethics of Generative AI, there has been little discussion about how research ethics should be updated for social science research practice. This paper fills this gap at the intersection of AI ethics and social science research ethics. Based on 17 semi-structured interviews, we present three narratives about generative AI and research ethics: 1) the equalizer narrative, 2) the meritocracy narrative, and 3) the community narrative. We argue that the ethics of AI-assisted social-scientific research cannot be reduced to universal checklists, and institutionally grounded research ethics principles are necessary. In all of the narratives, the technical functions of Generative AI were merely necessary conditions of unethical practices, while ethical dilemmas started to arise when such functions were situated in the institutional arrangements of academia. Our findings suggest that the ethics of AI-assisted research should encompass not only specific ethical rules concerning AI functionalities but also incorporate community engagement, educational imperatives, institutional governance, and the societal impact of such technologies to organize “ethics-in-practice.” This will require democratic deliberations to address the complex, emergent interactions between AI systems and societal structures.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeon, June & Kim, Lanu & Park, Jaehyuk, 2025. "The ethics of generative AI in social science research: A qualitative approach for institutionally grounded AI research ethics," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:81:y:2025:i:c:s0160791x25000260
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.102836
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X25000260
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.102836?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agnes Grudniewicz & David Moher & Kelly D. Cobey & Gregory L. Bryson & Samantha Cukier & Kristiann Allen & Clare Ardern & Lesley Balcom & Tiago Barros & Monica Berger & Jairo Buitrago Ciro & Lucia Cug, 2019. "Predatory journals: no definition, no defence," Nature, Nature, vol. 576(7786), pages 210-212, December.
    2. Daniele Fanelli & Rodrigo Costas & Vincent Larivière, 2015. "Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, June.
    3. Craig, Russell & Cox, Adam & Tourish, Dennis & Thorpe, Alistair, 2020. "Using retracted journal articles in psychology to understand research misconduct in the social sciences: What is to be done?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    4. Nina Cesare & Hedwig Lee & Tyler McCormick & Emma Spiro & Emilio Zagheni, 2018. "Promises and Pitfalls of Using Digital Traces for Demographic Research," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(5), pages 1979-1999, October.
    5. Kekez, Ivan & Lauwaert, Lode & Begičević Ređep, Nina, 2025. "Is artificial intelligence (AI) research biased and conceptually vague? A systematic review of research on bias and discrimination in the context of using AI in human resource management," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    6. Dubey, Rameshwar & Gunasekaran, Angappa & Papadopoulos, Thanos, 2024. "Benchmarking operations and supply chain management practices using Generative AI: Towards a theoretical framework," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    7. Morley, Jessica & Machado, Caio C.V. & Burr, Christopher & Cowls, Josh & Joshi, Indra & Taddeo, Mariarosaria & Floridi, Luciano, 2020. "The ethics of AI in health care: A mapping review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    8. Sun, Zhiyao & Che, Shuai & Wang, Jie, 2024. "Deconstruct artificial intelligence's productivity impact: A new technological insight," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    9. Qin, Meng & Wan, Yue & Dou, Junyi & Su, Chi Wei, 2024. "Artificial Intelligence: Intensifying or mitigating unemployment?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    10. Argyle, Lisa P. & Busby, Ethan C. & Fulda, Nancy & Gubler, Joshua R. & Rytting, Christopher & Wingate, David, 2023. "Out of One, Many: Using Language Models to Simulate Human Samples," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(3), pages 337-351, July.
    11. Samuel Fosso Wamba & Cameron Guthrie & Maciel M. Queiroz & Stefan Minner, 2024. "ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence: an exploratory study of key benefits and challenges in operations and supply chain management," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(16), pages 5676-5696, August.
    12. Shore, Adam & Tiwari, Manisha & Tandon, Priyanka & Foropon, Cyril, 2024. "Building entrepreneurial resilience during crisis using generative AI: An empirical study on SMEs," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Li, Lixu & Liu, Yaoqi & Jin, Yong & Cheng, T.C. Edwin & Zhang, Qianjun, 2024. "Generative AI-enabled supply chain management: The critical role of coordination and dynamism," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    2. Sanchaita Hazra & Bodhisattwa Prasad Majumder & Tuhin Chakrabarty, 2025. "AI Safety Should Prioritize the Future of Work," Papers 2504.13959, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2025.
    3. Li, Lixu & Zhu, Wenwen & Chen, Lujie & Liu, Yaoqi, 2024. "Generative AI usage and sustainable supply chain performance: A practice-based view," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    4. Rehman, Anisur & Behera, Rajat Kumar & Islam, Md Saiful & Elahi, Yasir Arafat & Abbasi, Faraz Ahmad & Imtiaz, Asma, 2024. "Drivers of metaverse adoption for enhancing marketing capabilities of retail SMEs," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    5. Alexander Kalgin & Olga Kalgina & Anna Lebedeva, 2019. "Publication Metrics as a Tool for Measuring Research Productivity and Their Relation to Motivation," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 1, pages 44-86.
    6. Jasper Brinkerink, 2023. "When Shooting for the Stars Becomes Aiming for Asterisks: P-Hacking in Family Business Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(2), pages 304-343, March.
    7. Pfeil, Katharina & Necker, Sarah & Feld, Lars P., 2023. "Compliance management in research institutes: Boon or bane?," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 23/1, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    8. Chekeny, Nixon S. & Misra, Sukant, 2024. "Responsible Conduct of Research for Graduate Students: What Should 69 They Know?," Applied Economics Teaching Resources (AETR), Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 6(3), October.
    9. Edré Moreira & Wagner Meira & Marcos André Gonçalves & Alberto H. F. Laender, 2023. "The rise of hyperprolific authors in computer science: characterization and implications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 2945-2974, May.
    10. André Grow & Daniela Perrotta & Emanuele Del Fava & Jorge Cimentada & Francesco Rampazzo & B. Sofia Gil-Clavel & Emilio Zagheni & René D. Flores & Ilana Ventura & Ingmar G. Weber, 2021. "How reliable is Facebook’s advertising data for use in social science research? Insights from a cross-national online survey," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2021-006, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    11. Gao, Lan & Wang, Jing, 2025. "Can artificial intelligence reduce energy vulnerability? Evidence from an international perspective," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    12. Alex Luscombe & Kevin Dick & Kevin Walby, 2022. "Algorithmic thinking in the public interest: navigating technical, legal, and ethical hurdles to web scraping in the social sciences," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1023-1044, June.
    13. Horbach, S.P.J.M.(Serge) & Halffman, W.(Willem), 2019. "The extent and causes of academic text recycling or ‘self-plagiarism’," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 492-502.
    14. Jurić, Tado, 2022. "Forecasting Migration and Integration Trends Using Digital Demography – A Case Study of Emigration Flows from Croatia to Austria and Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 70(1), pages 125-152.
    15. Bacolod, Marigee & Blum, Bernardo S. & Rangel, Marcos A. & Strange, William C., 2023. "Learners in cities: Agglomeration and the spatial division of cognition," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    16. Salim Moussa, 2022. "The propagation of error: retracted articles in marketing and their citations," Italian Journal of Marketing, Springer, vol. 2022(1), pages 11-36, March.
    17. Andrea Colasurdo & Riccardo Omenti, 2024. "Using online genealogical data for demographic research: An empirical examination of the FamiLinx database," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 51(41), pages 1299-1350.
    18. Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2021. "The right to refuse unwanted citations: rethinking the culture of science around the citation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5355-5360, June.
    19. Onur Öztürk & Zehra Taşkın, 2024. "How metric-based performance evaluation systems fuel the growth of questionable publications?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(5), pages 2729-2748, May.
    20. Daniel Muise & Nilam Ram & Thomas Robinson & Byron Reeves, 2023. "Identification, Impacts, and Opportunities of Three Common Measurement Considerations when using Digital Trace Data," Papers 2310.00197, arXiv.org.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:81:y:2025:i:c:s0160791x25000260. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.