More Versus Better: Artificial Intelligence, Incentives, and the Emerging Crisis in Peer Review

Author names are in alphabetical order. All authors contributed equally to the letter. Gartenberg and Murray are Senior Editors, Hasan is a Deputy Editor, and Pierce is Editor-in-Chief of Organization Science. Hasan served as Chair of the journal’s AI Task Force. The authors gratefully acknowledge support from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania and the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University that enabled this analysis. The authors also thank Pangram for providing research credits and technical support during this effort. The article benefited from the comments of Seth Carnahan, Scott Dyreng, Frank Levy, Andrew Nelson, Oren Reshef, Christopher Tang, Shirley Tang, and Matthew Walls. This project was submitted to the Duke University Institutional Review Board (IRB) for review, which ruled that it does not constitute human subjects research, as it is intended for institutional improvement. INFORMS legal counsel verified that the authors fully complied with the INFORMS Privacy Policy. AI was used in the following ways: Claude Code helped write Python scripts to merge data, calculate readability metrics, send batches to Pangram, and parse manuscripts into sections. Claude Code also helped write the Stata code for the analysis, particularly the figures. All code was reviewed by the authors before finalizing the analyses in the paper. Finally, the authors used Claude.AI to outline the discussion section and smooth out awkward phrasing. Grammarly was used for limited copyediting. All errors belong to the authors.