Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
AI and Editorial Workflows: Lessons from 2025
The year 2025 will be remembered as a turning point in scholarly publishing, when artificial intelligence shifted from a promising add-on to a central force in editorial workflows. For editors, reviewers, and early-career researchers across Asia, it became a real-time experiment in balancing innovation with integrity. AI tools matured to the point where their influence was impossible to ignore: they reshaped peer review, transformed manuscript handling, and sparked new conversations about equity, oversight, and trust.
Drawing on experiences from across the region, 2025 offered several critical lessons that continue to redefine quality, speed, and transparency in scientific communication.
AI Became Inevitable—No Longer Optional
Perhaps the clearest lesson of 2025 is that AI is no longer optional for editorial offices. Tasks that were once labor-intensive are now streamlined. Plagiarism screening, text similarity checks, language polishing, readability improvements, reference verification, retraction alerts, metadata cleaning, and initial quality triage are now handled efficiently.
The shift was particularly transformative for resource-limited journals in the Global South, enabling faster processing and greater visibility. Consolidated AI-assisted editorial dashboards allowed editors to focus on deeper intellectual evaluation rather than administrative triage.
The Rise of “AI-Aware Peer Review”
As AI-generated content became harder to distinguish from human writing, reviewers adapted. They placed greater scrutiny on data credibility and methods, emphasized contextual originality over textual novelty, paid attention to over-polished or generic narrative patterns, and required authors to disclose AI usage.
AI-usage declarations initially sparked debate but ultimately improved clarity and accountability. Reviewers began evaluating the science itself rather than how the text was written, a necessary evolution.
Integrity Challenges Surged—Detection Tools Kept Pace
2025 also saw a rise in sophisticated integrity challenges:
- Fabricated datasets
- AI-generated references
- Paper-mill patterns disguised with human-style variation
- Manipulated or AI-upscaled images
At the same time, forensic tools improved rapidly:
- Image integrity screening became more precise
- Metadata anomaly detectors flagged unnatural authorship or submission behaviors
- Citation verification exposed fabricated or mismatched references
Human expertise combined with AI screening emerged as the new gold standard; neither can function effectively alone.
The Global South Demonstrated Leadership
Contrary to expectations, journals across Pakistan, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Middle East led innovative practices. They streamlined workflows via open-source editorial tools, introduced multilingual AI-assisted editing options, trained local editors in AI ethics and verification, and piloted hybrid peer review models to reduce reviewer burden.
These innovations addressed visibility, accessibility, and processing delays, helping Global South journals compete sustainably.
Human Judgment Remains the Anchor
Despite technological acceleration, AI does not replace editorial expertise; it amplifies it. Editors remain responsible for evaluating conceptual contributions, understanding regional research contexts, interpreting nuanced ethical issues, and making final decisions about scientific merit.
AI excels at detecting patterns but cannot grasp scientific reasoning, disciplinary cultures, or regional priorities. Success lies in balancing automated precision with human insight.
The Path Forward: Responsible Innovation
Moving beyond 2025, the focus should be on responsible and inclusive AI adoption. Clear guidelines for authors, editors, and reviewers, training programs to narrow technology gaps in Asia, attention to data security and authorship ethics, and human–AI collaboration to enhance rather than replace judgment are essential.
Conclusion: 2025 Was a Reset, Not a Disruption
2025 did more than change workflows; it reshaped priorities. Speed can coexist with quality, automation can reinforce integrity, Global South journals can lead innovation, and technology is valuable only when guided by human values.
As we enter 2026, the challenge is to continue shaping AI as a tool that strengthens scientific communication, fairly, transparently, and inclusively. Scholarly publishing is no longer just evolving; it is being rebuilt in real time, and 2025 has given us the blueprint.
Keywords
AI in scholarly publishing Editorial workflows Peer review innovation Research integrity Academic publishing 2025 Global South journals
Mr. Fayyaz Ahmad Siddiqui is a B.Sc. student in Agriculture with a specialization in Plant Pathology at Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Punjab, Pakistan. His academic interests focus on plant diseases, fungal pathogens, crop protection, and sustainable agricultural practices. He is engaged in developing a strong foundation in plant health management, disease diagnosis, and research methodologies relevant to agricultural sciences. Mr. Siddiqui aspires to contribute to applied research and evidence-based solutions for improving crop productivity and plant disease management.
View All Posts by Fayyaz Ahmad SiddiquiDisclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of their affiliated institutions, the Asian Council of Science Editors (ACSE), or the Editor’s Café editorial team.
