Daniel A. Wang

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly explored as a tool to support institutional decision-making, including within research ethics committees (RECs). However, empirical evidence remains limited regarding how REC members define the acceptable scope of AI integration in ethics review. This study examines how members of Spanish Research Ethics Committees (CEI/CEIm) conceptualise AI use within institutional oversight. A national cross-sectional survey was distributed to 202 committee members and technical secretariat staff, yielding 63 responses (31.2%). The questionnaire combined closed-ended and open-ended items addressing perceived usefulness, acceptable levels of automation, governance concerns, and implementation barriers. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively with exploratory chi-square tests, and qualitative responses were examined using inductive thematic analysis. Respondents expressed strong interest in AI for administrative and documentary support but consistently rejected fully automated ethical decision-making. A statistically significant association was observed between annual workload and interest in AI implementation (χ 2 = 6.20, p = 0.045), with higher-workload committees reporting greater openness. Years of experience and institutional role were not significantly associated with attitudes. Across responses, continuous human oversight, accountability, transparency, and data protection emerged as central conditions for acceptability. The findings indicate that AI integration in research ethics oversight is shaped not only by technological feasibility but by institutional concerns regarding responsibility, legitimacy, and deliberative authority. The study contributes empirical insight into how oversight institutions negotiate the acceptable boundaries of AI-assisted decision support in ethically sensitive governance contexts.