Collective AI use is associated with researcher engagement: Real-time evidence from a scientific conference

preprint OA: closed
Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

Recent large-scale bibliometric analyses suggest that individual AI use can increase productivity while reducing downstream engagement and topic diversity. Here we ask whether collective AI deployment is associated with shared engagement. Using an Audience Response Engagement (ARE) system at NGS Expo 2025 (N=110 biomedical researchers), we captured real-time consensus and generated updated visualizations within minutes. Our data reveal a substantial gap between adoption and transparency: 93.6% of researchers use AI at least weekly, yet only 5.5% consistently disclose this usage—a 17-fold disparity. This pattern is consistent with systemic policy uncertainty (39.1% report unclear guidelines). Behavioral clustering identifies a “High-Concern” group (31%) as a candidate for targeted interventions: highest productivity yet lowest disclosure. These findings suggest that collective AI deployment in physical settings is associated with shared engagement.
Full text 1,048 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Recent large-scale bibliometric analyses suggest that individual AI use can increase productivity while reducing downstream engagement and topic diversity. Here we ask whether collective AI deployment is associated with shared engagement. Using an Audience Response Engagement (ARE) system at NGS Expo 2025 (N=110 biomedical researchers), we captured real-time consensus and generated updated visualizations within minutes. Our data reveal a substantial gap between adoption and transparency: 93.6% of researchers use AI at least weekly, yet only 5.5% consistently disclose this usage—a 17-fold disparity. This pattern is consistent with systemic policy uncertainty (39.1% report unclear guidelines). Behavioral clustering identifies a “High-Concern” group (31%) as a candidate for targeted interventions: highest productivity yet lowest disclosure. These findings suggest that collective AI deployment in physical settings is associated with shared engagement. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-06-13T06:42:57.164913+00:00