한국도서관·정보학회지 (Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society)

한국도서관·정보학회 (Korean Library and Information Science Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

학술 논문 작성에서의 생성형 AI 서비스 활용 행태에 대한 탐색적 연구 - CRediT(Contributor Roles Taxonomy)의 역할 분류를 중심으로 -

Exploring the Use of Generative AI Services in Scholarly Writing Process: A CRediT(Contributor Roles Taxonomy)-Based Approach

  • 최아름 (경북대학교 사회과학대학 일반대학원 문헌정보학과, 대구경북과학기술원) ;
  • 최재황 (경북대학교 사회과학대학 문헌정보학과)
  • 투고 : 2025.05.23
  • 심사 : 2025.06.11
  • 발행 : 2025.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 다양한 학문 분야 연구자들이 논문 작성 과정에서 생성형 인공지능(Generative AI) 도구를 어떻게 활용하고 있는지를 분석하고, 그 활용 행태에 영향을 미치는 요인을 탐색하였다. 과업 중심 정보행태 이론과 CRediT(Contributor Roles Taxonomy) 역할 분류 체계를 기반으로 설문조사를 설계하였으며, 총 113명의 대학원 이상 연구자를 대상으로 온라인 조사를 실시하였다. 분석 결과, 응답자의 약 90%가 논문 작성 시 생성형 AI를 활용한 경험이 있었으며, '집필-검토 및 수정', '집필 - 초안 작성', '개념화' 과업에서 활용도가 높았다. 직위와 학문 분야에 따라 일부 과업에서 유의미한 활용 차이가 나타났으며, 응답자들은 신뢰성과 전문성 부족을 주요 장애 요인으로 지적하였다. 생성형 AI의 책임 있는 활용을 위해 도서관은 유료 도구 접근 지원, 윤리 가이드 제공, 도구 비교 정보 제공 등 실천적 지원을 수행해야 할 필요가 있으며, 본 연구는 이에 대한 기초자료를 제공하는데 그 목적이 있다.

This exploratory study investigates how researchers across various academic disciplines utilize generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools in the scholarly writing process and what factors influence their use. Grounded in the Task-based Information Behavior theory and the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) framework, this study employed a structured survey targeting graduate-level and professional researchers. A total of 113 valid responses were collected via an online questionnaire. The results show that approximately 90% of respondents had experience using generative AI tools when writing papers, with the highest usage reported in tasks related to "Writing - Review & Editing", "Writing - Original Draft Preparation", and "Conceptualization". Differences in AI usage patterns were observed across academic fields and career stages in some tasks. Key challenges cited by respondents included concerns over the reliability and subject-matter competence of AI-generated outputs. In order to utilize generative AI responsibly, academic libraries need to provide practical support such as supporting access to paid tools, providing ethical usage guidelines, and curated comparative evaluations of different AI platforms. The purpose of this study is to provide basic data for this.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Jang, Su Hyun & Nam, Young Joon (2023). A study on the role of university libraries in the cultivation of generative AI literacy by users. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 40(2), 263-282. https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2023.40.2.263
  2. Jeong, Se Hyeon & Lee, Jee Yeon (2025). A study on the intent to use generative AI tools by researchers in the field of science and technology. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 42(1), 455-488. https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2025.42.1.455
  3. Kim, Hyung-Tae & Kwak, Seung-Jin (2024). An analysis of domestic and foreign research trends related to libraries and artificial intelligence. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 58(3), 309-332. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2024.58.3.309
  4. Kim, Sangin (2024). A Study on Generative AI Technology for Enhancing Creativity in Innovative Research (정책연구-2023-15). National Research Foundation of Korea.
  5. Lee, Jeong-Mee (2023). A study on the data literacy education in the library of the Chat GPT, generative AI era. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 57(3), 303-323. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2023.57.3.303
  6. Oh, Euikyung (2025). College students' AI utilization and perception. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 59(1), 671-692. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2025.59.1.671
  7. Park, Junghun (2025). A study on the current status analysis and service strategies of LLM-based conversational AI academic information services. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 42(1), 29-57. https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2025.42.1.029
  8. Rha, Eun Youp (2023). An exploratory study of natural scientists' information seeking behavior when writing a research proposal. Journal of the Korean Biblia Society for Library and Information Science, 34(1), 53-74. https://doi.org/10.14699/KBIBLIA.2023.34.1.053
  9. Rha, Eun Youp (2025). Exploring social aspects of information seeking behavior using cognitive sociology. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 42(1), 59-81. https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2025.42.1.059
  10. Allen, L., O'Connell, A., & Kiermer, V. (2019). How can we ensure visibility and diversity in research contributions? How the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT) is helping the shift from authorship to contributorship. Learned Publishing, 32(1), 71-74. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1210
  11. Bae, Jangseong, Lee, Changki, Lim, Soojong, & Kim, Hyunki (2020). Korean Semantic Role Labeling with BERT. Journal of Korean Institute of Information Scientists and Engineers, 47(11), 1021-1026. https://doi.org/10.5626/JOK.2020.47.11.1021
  12. Byström, K. & Järvelin, K. (1995). Task complexity affects information seeking and use. Information Processing & Management, 31(2), 191-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4573(95)80035-R
  13. Chanpradit, T. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence in academic writing in higher education: a systematic review. Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology, 9(4), 889-906. https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6128
  14. Khan, N., Khan, Z., Koubaa, A., Khan, M. K., & Salleh, R. (2024). Global insights and the impact of generative AI-ChatGPT on multidisciplinary: a systematic review and bibliometric analysis. Connection Science, 36(1), 2353630. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540091.2024.2353630
  15. Leckie, G. J., Pettigrew, K. E., & Sylvain, C. (1996). Modeling the information seeking of professionals: a general model derived from research on engineers, health care professionals, and lawyers. The Library Quarterly, 66(2), 161-193. https://doi.org/10.1086/602864
  16. Lee, J.-W., Moon, H.-K., & Kim, D. (2024, October 10). Korean translation of CRediT. Contributorship Collaboration. Available: https://contributorshipcollaboration.github.io/projects/translation/translations/ko
  17. Li, Y. & Belkin, N. J. (2008). A faceted approach to conceptualizing tasks in information seeking. Information Processing & Management, 44(6), 1822-1837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2008.07.005
  18. Mulligan, A., Calero, M. A., Mansell, N., & Goodchild, L. (2024). Insights 2024: Attitudes toward AI. Elsevier. Available: https://www.elsevier.com/insights/attitudes-toward-ai
  19. Rha, E. Y. (2018). Social aspects of task-based information seeking behavior: the conceptual integration of cognitive sociology and practice theory. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Human Information Interaction & Retrieval, 293-296. https://doi.org/10.1145/3176349.317688
  20. Van Noorden, R. & Perkel, J. M. (2023). AI and science: what 1,600 researchers think. Nature, 621(7980), 672-675. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-02980-0