Scientific peer review at a crossroads: Tensions and challenges

Abstract

Academia is currently experiencing an epistemological crisis in which technological innovation collides with intellectual authorship. Peer review is facing a crisis of identity due to the growing use of generative artificial intelligence to produce evaluation reports, a trend that international academic forums have identified as a potential threat to research integrity. Driven by the saturation of editorial systems and increasing demands for rapid publication, this phenomenon threatens to replace human critical judgment with “synthetic reviews” that, although structurally coherent, lack the analytical depth and ethical sensitivity required to assess scientific innovation adequately. Delegating evaluation processes to algorithms risks introducing invisible biases, dehumanizing scholarly dialogue, and undermining the trust relationship between authors and academic journals. In response, the journal Gestión I+D emphasizes the urgent need to recognize these tensions and confront emerging challenges by promoting ethical frameworks for the regulation of these tools. It further reaffirms that technology should function solely as an operational support mechanism and never as a substitute for critical thinking, which remains an essential and inherently human faculty for ensuring rigor and originality in the advancement of knowledge.