Dynamic relationships between Human Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence in academic research

Abstract

Objective. Determine which research activities must continue to be assumed by human researchers because they represent a limitation to the current developments of Artificial Intelligence for the context of current higher education. Method. To validate this hypothesis, a hermeneutic-critical research approach is adopted, which seeks to interpret advances in previous research from contextualized questions. To develop this research approach, qualitative methods are used, which, although they do not rule out the use of numbers, generate the validation of the hypothesis from non-numerical analysis. For this reason, the documentary review of new knowledge products classified as scientific by the medium in which they have been published is adopted as an information collection strategy. Results. The knowledge of Human Intelligence was organized into four levels for the management of research data: first, declarative; second, procedural; third, schematic; and strategic fourth. Within the framework of this classification, the present and expected developments of Artificial Intelligence were interpreted, which have six types: reactive, short-term memory, autonomous, theory of mind, general and superintelligence. Currently, only the first three types of artificial intelligence have been developed, which correspond to the first two levels of human knowledge. Therefore, it is possible to determine that Artificial Intelligence has the possibility of assuming the research activities of the first two levels and human intelligence refers to the last two levels. Conclusions. Academic research must accept the dynamic coexistence between Human Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence, considering that the former has the possibility of using the latter as support in the generation of new knowledge. While Artificial Intelligence can make review products, Human Intelligence has the possibility of making reflection and proposal products to ensure advances in knowledge. Consequently, the academic community must prioritize the publication of exclusive products of human activity, both in its editorial processes and in strategies to measure the quality of higher education institutions.