Content Guide
Effective Date: January 18, 2026
Last Updated: January 18, 2026
Our Editorial Philosophy
Society & AI produces scholarship that bridges substantive academic inquiry with accessible public discourse. Our work addresses the complex intersections of artificial intelligence, education, and societal transformation—domains that demand both analytical precision and communicative clarity.
We recognize that different forms of knowledge require different modes of expression. A theoretical framework exploring the epistemological implications of AI in education serves distinct purposes from a practitioner’s reflection on classroom experience with generative tools. Accordingly, we have developed a taxonomy of content types, each with its own conventions, expectations, and scholarly functions.
A Living Editorial Voice
Our content taxonomy is not fixed. As the field of AI and society evolves—and as we refine our understanding of how best to serve our readers—we continuously assess and expand our editorial categories. New forms of scholarly expression may emerge; existing categories may be refined or consolidated. This dynamism reflects our commitment to responsive, relevant scholarship rather than rigid adherence to predetermined formats.
We invite readers to engage with our work understanding that our editorial voice is itself a site of ongoing inquiry and development.
Content Types
The following table provides an overview of our current content categories, their purposes, and what readers may expect from each.
Table 1
Society & AI Content Type Taxonomy
| Content Type | Description | Characteristics |
|---|---|---|
| Perspectives | Thought-provoking opinion pieces that offer personal or critical viewpoints on AI and society. These articles present argued positions on contested questions, informed by scholarship but driven by interpretive engagement. | Authored voice; argumentative structure; engages with contemporary debates; may challenge conventional assumptions; typically 1,500–3,000 words. |
| Commentary | Timely analysis of current developments, policy decisions, or emerging trends in AI and education. Commentary pieces contextualize news and events within broader scholarly and societal frameworks. | Responsive to current events; analytical rather than purely descriptive; draws connections to research literature; typically 1,000–2,500 words. |
| Insights | Reflections from practitioners, educators, and professionals working at the intersection of AI and society. These pieces foreground lived experience and professional judgment, offering grounded perspectives on theory in practice. | Practitioner voice; experiential grounding; bridges theory and practice; often includes concrete examples from professional contexts; typically 1,500–2,500 words. |
| Research | Formal research articles presenting original empirical findings, systematic reviews, or theoretical contributions. These pieces adhere to scholarly conventions including literature review, methodology, and evidence-based argumentation. | Academic rigor; peer consultation; methodological transparency; citations to primary literature; typically 3,000–6,000 words or longer. |
| Working Papers | Scholarly works in progress shared to invite feedback and advance discourse. Working papers present developing ideas, preliminary findings, or theoretical explorations that benefit from community engagement before formal publication. | Provisional status clearly indicated; welcomes critique; may evolve substantially; contributes to open scholarship practices. |
| Fundamental Concepts | Explanatory articles that introduce and clarify core ideas, theoretical frameworks, or foundational knowledge essential to understanding AI and society. These pieces prioritize pedagogical clarity and conceptual precision. | Accessible to non-specialists; definitional clarity; builds conceptual vocabulary; often serves as reference material; typically 1,500–3,000 words. |
| Blog | Informal explorations, reflections, and updates that complement our formal scholarship. Blog posts may address emerging questions, share preliminary thinking, or engage with the scholarly community in conversational registers. | Conversational tone; exploratory orientation; may be shorter or more tentative than formal articles; invites dialogue. |
| Currents | Curated roundups of recent developments, news, and noteworthy publications in AI and education. Currents pieces help readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving landscape without requiring independent monitoring of multiple sources. | Aggregative format; regular publication cadence; contextualizing commentary; links to primary sources. |
| Inquiry | Exploratory articles that pose questions rather than assert conclusions. Inquiry pieces investigate open problems, examine tensions in the field, or map contested terrain—modeling the intellectual humility that characterizes careful scholarship. | Question-driven; acknowledges uncertainty; maps multiple perspectives; invites reader engagement with unresolved issues. |
| Focus Areas | Thematic deep-dives that examine Society & AI's four foundational research domains: Systems Complexity, Knowledge Intelligence, Human Flourishing, and Educational Equity. These interconnected areas constitute the intellectual architecture of our research program, guiding inquiry into how AI systems interact with societal structures, how knowledge is produced and distributed, how technology can support human development, and how educational access and opportunity can be advanced. | In-depth coverage; foundational to Society & AI's mission; may include multiple related pieces; serves as a resource hub for each research domain. |
| Young Minds | Content designed for younger audiences, introducing concepts of AI, society, and technology in age-appropriate ways. These pieces support intergenerational dialogue about technological futures and cultivate critical thinking from an early age. | Accessible language; developmentally appropriate; may include interactive elements; supports educational use. |
Reading Our Work
Each content type serves distinct purposes within our broader mission of advancing society-centered approaches to artificial intelligence. We encourage readers to:
- Consider the genre when evaluating claims and arguments. A perspective piece operates under different epistemic norms than a research article.
- Engage critically with all content, recognizing that even careful scholarship involves interpretive choices and limitations.
- Provide feedback when our work prompts questions, disagreements, or ideas for future inquiry.
Questions and Feedback
We welcome inquiries about our editorial practices and content taxonomy. Readers who wish to propose new content types, suggest refinements to existing categories, or discuss potential contributions are encouraged to contact us through our contact page.
This Content Guide was last updated on January 18, 2026.