Bilimsel Araştırmalarda Kullanılan Yapay Zeka Uygulamalarına Nasıl Yer Verilmeli?

Öz

Günümüzde yapay zeka uygulamaları (ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Microsoft Copilot vb.) hemen hemen her alanda bilimsel çalışmalarda kullanılmaktadır. Yapay zeka uygulamalarıyla literatür taraması, metin düzenleme, metin taslağı hazırlama veya yazma, veri seti oluşturma, görsel veya grafiksel tasarım oluşturma, veri analizi, dil çevirisi ve düzeltmesi, beyin fırtınası veya fikir geliştirme yapılabilmektedir. Bu konuyla ilgili olarak yapılan araştırmalar ve yapay zeka uygulamaları kullanılan bilimsel çalışmalar her geçen gün artmaktadır. Akademide yapay zekanın kullanımının giderek yaygınlaşmasıyla birlikte, bu uygulamaların bilimsel yayınlardaki yeri ve rolüne ilişkin çalışmalar da hızla artmaktadır. Bununla birlikte, yapay zeka katkılarının akademik yayınlarda nasıl temsil edilmesi gerektiği konusunda halen ortak bir görüş birliği bulunmamaktadır. Yazarlar yapay zeka uygulamalarında faydalanmaları durumunda yapay zeka uygulamalarına yazar olarak yer verildiği durumlar olsa da sayıları oldukça az olup daha çok yapay zeka katkıları atıf yada teşekkür bölümünde yer verilmektedir. Teşekkür bölümlerinde hangi amaçla yararlandıkları belirtildiği gibi genel bir ifadeyle teşekkür edildiği görülmektedir. Öte yandan, kimi çalışmalarda yapay zeka kullanılmadığı özellikle vurgulanarak, konunun etik ve yöntemsel boyutlarına dikkat çekilmektedir. Bu çalışmada günümüzde her alanda kullanılan ve pekçok açıdan istifade edinilen yapay zeka uygulamalarına bilimsel yayınlarda nasıl yer verildiğine (atıf, teşekkür, yazar) ilişkin literatür taranmış ve mevcut yaklaşımlar derlenmiştir. Literatür incelendiğinde yapay zekaya teşekkür alt bölümlerini dört ana başlık ve dokuz alt başlık altında toplanabilmektedir. Bu sınıflandırma, bilim dünyasında yapay zekanın nasıl konumlandırıldığını daha iyi anlamaya katkı sağlamakta ve akademik yayıncılıkta etik ilkeler ile standartların oluşturulmasına yönelik tartışmalara zemin hazırlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yapay Zeka
• Teşekkür
• Yazar
• Atıf
• Etik Ilkeler
• ChatGPT
• Copilot

How to Acknowledge Artificial Intelligence Applications in Scientific Research

Öz

Today, artificial intelligence applications (such as ChatGPT, Google Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot) are being utilized in almost every field of scientific research. Through artificial intelligence tools, researchers can perform tasks such as literature review, text editing, drafting or writing manuscripts, dataset creation, visual and graphical design, data analysis, language translation and proofreading, as well as brainstorming and idea generation. The number of studies employing artificial intelligence in scientific work is rapidly increasing, and as the use of artificial intelligence in academia expands, research focusing on the role and representation of artificial intelligence in scholarly publications is also growing significantly. However, there is still no common consensus on how artificial intelligence contributions should be represented in academic writing. Although there are rare cases where artificial intelligence applications have been listed as co-authors, the majority of contributions are more frequently acknowledged either through citations or in the acknowledgement section. In acknowledgement sections, authors may specify the exact purpose for which artificial intelligence was employed, while in other cases, a more general expression of gratitude is provided. Conversely, some studies explicitly emphasize that no artificial intelligence assistance was used, thereby drawing attention to the ethical and methodological dimensions of the issue. This study reviews the existing literature to examine how artificial intelligence applications, which are now widely used and beneficial in many aspects, are represented in academic publications (as citation, acknowledgement, or authorship). The analysis reveals that acknowledgements of artificial intelligence can be categorized under four main themes and nine subcategories. This classification contributes to a better understanding of how artificial intelligence is positioned in the scientific community and provides a basis for discussions on the development of ethical principles and standards in academic publishing.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Artificial Intelligence
• Acknowledgement
• Author
• Citation
• Ethical Principles
• ChatGPT
• Copilot

Kaynakça

1. Alkaissi, H., & McFarlane, S. I. (2023). Artificial hallucinations in ChatGPT: implications in scientific writing. Cureus, 15(2).
2. Álvarez-Bornstein, B., & Montesi, M. (2020). Funding acknowledgements in scientific publications: A literature review. Research Evaluation, 29(4), 469-488.
3. Arizona State University (ASU) Library (2025). Library Guides, Acknowledging AI Usage in Your Work, https://libguides.asu.edu/generativeai/acknowledgement?utm_source=chatgpt.com (21.08.2025).
4. Athaluri, S. A., Manthena, S. V., Kesapragada, V. K. M., Yarlagadda, V., Dave, T., & Duddumpudi, R. T. S. (2023). Exploring the boundaries of reality: investigating the phenomenon of artificial intelligence hallucination in scientific writing through ChatGPT references. Cureus, 15(4).
5. BaHammam, A. S. (2023). Balancing innovation and integrity: The role of AI in research and scientific writing. Nature and Science of Sleep, 1153-1156.
6. Bazerman, C. (1984). Modern evolution of the experimental report in physics: Spectroscopic articles in Physical Review, 1893-1980. Social studies of science, 14(2), 163-196
7. Biagini, G. (2025). Towards an AI-Literate Future: A systematic literature review exploring education, ethics, and applications. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 1-51.
8. Biçer, A. (2025). Bilimsel Yayınlarda Teşekkür Kısımları Üzerine Bir İnceleme, Editör Salih Uslu, Eğitim Bilimlerinde Akademik Araştırma ve Değerlendirmeler, Özgür Yayınları, Gaziantep. https://doi.org/10.58830/ozgur.pub682.c2857, SBN (PDF): 978-625-5958-60-0

9. Buholayka, M., Zouabi, R., & Tadinada, A. (2023). The readiness of ChatGPT to write scientific case reports independently: a comparative evaluation between human and artificial intelligence. Cureus, 15(5)
10. Castellanos-Gomez, A. (2023). Good practices for scientific article writing with ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence language models. Nanomanufacturing, 3(2), 135-138
11. Cheng, A., Calhoun, A., & Reedy, G. (2025). Artificial intelligence-assisted academic writing: recommendations for ethical use. Advances in Simulation, 10(1), 22.
12. Chew, R., Bollenbacher, J., Wenger, M., Speer, J., & Kim, A. (2023). LLM-assisted content analysis: Using large language models to support deductive coding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.14924.
13. Christou, P. A. (2023). A critical perspective over whether and how to acknowledge the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in qualitative studies. The Qualitative Report, 28(7), 1981-1991.
14. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (2023). Artificial intelligence (AI) in research and publication. COPE Discussion Document, https://publicationethics.org/resources/discussion-documents/artificial-intelligence-ai-research-and-publication (21.08.2025).
15. Coşkun, F., & Gülleroğlu, H. D. (2021). Yapay zekânın tarih içindeki gelişimi ve eğitimde kullanılması. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 54(3), 947-966
16. Demirok, K., Eren, F., & Çayirli, D. (2025). Üretken Yapay Zeka Performans Kıyaslaması: ChatGPT ve DeepSeek'in Kullanıcı Etkileşimleri Üzerindeki Etkisi. Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri Dergisi, 7(1), 1-39.
17. Düzce Üniversitesi Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi (2025). Üretken Yapay Zeka (YZ) Politikası [Erişim: 21.08.2025, https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/dubited/page/18559 ]
18. Elsevier (2024a) Generative AI policies for journals [Erişim: 21.08.2025, https://www.elsevier.com/en-au/about/policies-and-standards/generative-ai-policies-for-journals ]
19. Elsevier (2024b) CRediT author statement, https://www.elsevier.com/en-au/researcher/author/policies-and-guidelines/credit-author-statement (21.08.2025).
20. European Research Area (ERA) (2024). Guidelines on the responsible use of generative AI in research developed by the European Research Area Forum, https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/news/all-research-and-innovation-news/guidelines-responsible-use-generative-ai-research-developed-european-research-area-forum-2024-03-20_en?utm_source=chatgpt.com (21.08.2025).
21. Gignac, G. E. (2025). The AI attribution gap: Encouraging transparent acknowledgment in the age of AI. Intelligence, 108, 101880.
22. Gorraiz, J. (2025). Acknowledging the new invisible colleague: Addressing the recognition of Open AI contributions in in scientific publishing. Journal of Informetrics, 19(2), 101642.
23. Hosseini, M., Resnik, D. B., & Holmes, K. (2023). The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence tools in writing scholarly manuscripts. Research Ethics, 19(4), 449-465.
24. Kacena, M. A., Plotkin, L. I., & Fehrenbacher, J. C. (2024). The use of artificial intelligence in writing scientific review articles. Current Osteoporosis Reports, 22(1), 115-121.
25. Kousha, K. (2024). How is ChatGPT acknowledged in academic publications?. Scientometrics, 129(12), 7959-7969.
26. Lee, J. Y. (2023). Can an artificial intelligence chatbot be the author of a scholarly article?. Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, 20, 6.
27. Microsoft (2025). Copilot (GPT-4) [Large Language Model]. https://copilot.microsoft.com/
28. Nature Editorial (2023). Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use, Vol. 613,612. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00191-1
29. Nazarovets, S., & Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2024). ChatGPT as an “author”: Bibliometric analysis to assess the validity of authorship. Accountability in Research, 1-11.
30. Newcastle Üniversitesi (2025). Acknowledging use of AI (What is acknowledgment), https://www.ncl.ac.uk/academic-skills-kit/good-academic-practice/artificial-intelligence/acknowledging/?utm_source=chatgpt.com (21.08.2025).
31. O'Connor, S. (2023). Open Artificial Intelligence Platforms in Nursing Education:: Tools for Academic Progress or Abuse?. Nurse education in practice, 66, 103537.
32. OpenAI. (2025). ChatGPT (GPT-5) [Yapay zekâ büyük dil modeli]. OpenAI. https://chat.openai.com/
33. Queiroz, A. B. L., Sartori, L. R. M., & Moraes, R. R. (2025). Editorial policies for use and acknowledgment of artificial intelligence in dental journals. Journal of Dentistry, 105923
34. Raman, R. (2023). Transparency in research: An analysis of ChatGPT usage acknowledgment by authors across disciplines and geographies. Accountability in Research, 32(3), 277–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2273377
35. Rangapur, A., & Rangapur, A. (2024). The battle of llms: A comparative study in conversational qa tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.18344.
36. Resnik, D. B., & Hosseini, M. (2025). Disclosing artificial intelligence use in scientific research and publication: When should disclosure be mandatory, optional, or unnecessary?. Accountability in research, 1-13.
37. Sahin, S., & Erkmen, B. (2023). Navigating the Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Scholarly Authorship: Transparency and Responsibility in the Technological Era. European Journal of Therapeutics, 29(4), 994-996.
38. Seçen, H. (2024). Bilimsel Yayınlarda Yazarlık Hakkı: Etik İlkeler ve Uygulama Sorunları. Helal ve Etik Araştırmalar Dergisi 6(2), 71-85.
39. Smirnova, N., Mayr, P. (2023). A comprehensive analysis of acknowledgement texts in Web of Science: a case study on four scientific domains. Scientometrics 128, 709-734, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04554-9
40. Sakarya Uygulamalı Bilimler Üniversitesi (SUBU) Uzaktan Eğitim Merkezi (UZEM) (2024). Yapay Zeka Araçları Tanıtma Rehberi [Erişim: 02.11.2025, https://uzem.subu.edu.tr/sites/uzem.subu.edu.tr/files/2024-12/Yapay%20Zeka%20Ara%C3%A7lar%C4%B1%20Tan%C4%B1tma%20Rehberi.pdf ]
41. Springer (2024). Springer Nature policy on AI and AI-assisted technologies in writing and peer review, https://www.springernature.com/gp/policies/editorial-policies/ai (02.11.2025).
42. Teixeira da Silva, J. A., Tsigaris, P., & Vuong, Q. H. (2023). Acknowledgments in scientific papers. Publishing Research Quarterly, 39(3), 280-299.
43. Thesify AI. (2025). AI policies in academic publishing (2025 update), https://www.thesify.ai/blog/ai-policies-academic-publishing-2025 (02.11.2025)
44. Tokur Kesgin M. Etik Olmayan Yazarlık Uygulamaları (Editorial). YBH dergisi.2021;2(2): i-viii. DOI : 10.29228/llnursing.55669
45. Web of Scieence (WOS) (2025). https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/summary/fa779491-158c-4702-8a79-f44a372fb19f-018619337b/relevance/1 (02.11.2025).
46. Xiao, Z., Yuan, X., & Oudeyer, P. Y. (2023, March). Supporting qualitative analysis with large language models: Combining codebook with GPT-3 for deductive coding. In Companion proceedings of the 28th international conference on intelligent user interfaces (pp. 75-78).
47. VNGRS. (2025). Kumru AI [Yapay zekâ büyük dil modeli]. https://kumru.ai/
48. Yılmaz, K. (2024). Türkiye’de Yayınlanan Bilimsel Araştırma ve Yayın Etiği Konulu Makalelerin İncelenmesi (1993-2022). MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 13(1), 77-92.
49. Yüksek Öğretim Kurumu (YÖK) (2025). Yükseköğretim Kurumları Bilimsel Araştırma ve Yayın Faaliyetlerinde Üretken Yapay Zeka Kullanımına Dair Etik Rehber, Chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://eski.yok.gov.tr/Documents/2024/yapay-zeka-kullanimina-dair-etik-rehber.pdf (21.08.2025).
50. Yuan, Y., Su, M., & Li, X. (2024). What makes people say thanks to AI. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 131-149). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
51. Yüksel, H. (2003). Makalelerde İsimlerin Belirlenmesi (Yayın Etiği II. Bölüm), Türk Kardiyol. Dem. Arş.; 31:35-39.
52. Zirpoli, C. T. (2023). Generative Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Law. CRS Legal Sidebar (February 23, 2023) 10922 (5 pages). https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom/243