AI in Action: Behind the Scenes at Emerald Publishing

Author: Scheherazade Khan, Peer Review Lead, Emerald Publishing

Across the academic publishing industry, leading voices are calling for a shift in how AI is being deployed. Not only to streamline production, but to genuinely support research integrity, peer review, and improve the experience of those who contribute to scholarly communication. Major publishers are investing in AI tools to assist with peer review, editorial checks, and summarising research, while also acknowledging the risks of misuse and the need for human oversight.

At the same time, industry bodies such as the STM Association are working to establish clear guidelines for transparent AI use, recognising that trust in scholarly publishing depends on clarity about how these tools are used.

Indeed, transparency is key.

As AI becomes more embedded in publishing workflows, it’s essential that researchers know when and how these tools are being used.

Whether it’s helping to screen manuscripts, match reviewers, or create summaries, we’re sharing how Emerald is using AI so people know what’s happening behind the scenes. It’s all about building trust, opening up the conversation, and making sure these tools support researchers - not just serve business goals.

In keeping with Peer Review Week 2025’s theme ‘Rethinking Peer Review in the AI Era’, we explored how AI is being used at Emerald, including for more public-facing teams such as our Author Community Engagement team and Marketing teams, as well as departments that are looking at submission and production workflows more directly. We asked some teams across the business to shed light on how AI is being used to improve the experiences and accessibility of users and producers of academic research.

PEER REVIEW

The Peer Review team at Emerald has been occupied with the topic of AI for quite a while now, both on the creation of research and its submission and production. Concerns around the ethics of AI use have made headlines in recent years, raising questions as to why it has become so prevalent.

The answer lies in the increased pressure of academia that has become apparent since the COVID-19 pandemic.

While leading with caution, the Peer Review team at Emerald is attempting to consider where AI can be useful and productive to alleviate some of that pressure, both within the team and for the editors of Emerald journals. To this end, five popular AI-driven reviewer tools and integrated submission support tools have already been tested, and they continue to look at more. Indeed, the manuscript management tool, EditorialAssist, is going to be piloted on various Emerald journals later this year.

Integrated within the ScholarOne interface, EditorAssist is an AI-powered tool that aims to provide editorial teams with support to screen, summarise, and make decisions on submitted manuscripts. Important to note, however, tools like EditorAssist are not being used as blanket assessment of submitted content. Instead, they are there to help editorial teams manage submissions more effectively and provide possible topics that Editors could ask reviewers to look at in more detail.

EMERALD PUBLISHING SERVICES

The EPS team at Emerald offer diamond open access end-to-end publication services, collaborating with society journals that are owned and funded by relevant institutions but run by Emerald.

The team is taking a measured approach to AI adoption, focusing on practical value over novelty.

Their work has shown that effective use of AI involves not only identifying areas where it enhances workflows but also recognising where it offers limited benefit. This balanced evaluation ensures that AI is implemented where it genuinely improves the experience for authors, reviewers and researchers, while preserving human expertise where it matters most.

Currently, their focus is on responsible integration, committed to being transparent with authors about how AI is used, particularly in ways that uphold the integrity of peer review. For example, they have now implemented updated AI usage guidelines across all EPS journals, ensuring our processes remain robust and trustworthy.

Moreover, they have seen promising use cases emerge, to support annual reporting analysis, summarise Special Issue forms during due diligence checks, and potentially streamline editorial board reviews. These applications show how AI can help free up capacity for more strategic work.

At the same time, they have recognised that for tasks like market research, traditional platforms still outperform AI tools, highlighting that part of learning to use AI effectively is knowing when not to use it.

REVENUE OPERATIONS

The Revenue Operations team at Emerald has been actively experimenting with AI to streamline internal processes and improve operational efficiency. Some of the most promising applications have involved automating time-consuming tasks, such as formatting data, generating templated communications, and extracting information from documents.

These uses have saved hours of manual work, freeing up teams to focus on more strategic activities. AI has also supported sales enablement by helping to build training materials and compare product positioning, though always with human oversight to ensure accuracy and relevance.

At the same time, the team has found that not all tasks benefit equally from AI.

In areas like data cleansing or forecasting, AI has offered useful insights but still requires careful validation and refinement.

This iterative process—testing, learning, and adjusting—has helped ensure that AI is used responsibly and effectively.

CONCLUSION

Our approach at Emerald remains grounded: AI is a tool, not a solution in itself.

And just as importantly, it’s a tool we’re learning from; not just about what it can do, but about where human expertise remains irreplaceable.  We’re being upfront about what’s working - and what’s not - so people know we’re not just jumping on the AI craze. It’s about building trust and making sure these tools actually help the academic community do great work.

Using human expertise as guardrails to AI-based tools, the teams across Emerald have been able to assess their strengths and limitations in real-world workflows. Rather than adopting AI for novelty’s sake, they’ve focused on whether these tools genuinely support reviewers, editors, and readers, whether by improving reviewer matching, streamlining submission checks, or enhancing communication. In some cases, the tools have shown promise; in others, they’ve reinforced the need for human judgment and contextual understanding. This careful, iterative approach reflects Emerald’s broader commitment to responsible innovation: using AI where it helps, and knowing when to rely on people instead.

References

[i] Publishers Adopt AI Tools to Bolster Research Integrity

[ii] New STM Draft Report: Classifying AI Use in Manuscript Preparation - STM Association

[iii] Chatbots Have Thoroughly Infiltrated Scientific Publishing | Scientific American