Generative AI

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) USE POLICY

This journal supports the responsible, transparent, and ethical use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies in scholarly publishing. This policy applies to authors, editors, and reviewers and is intended to safeguard research integrity, originality, accountability, confidentiality, and the quality of scholarly publications.

1. General Principles

Artificial Intelligence, including Generative Artificial Intelligence tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot, and similar technologies, may be used only as supporting tools and must not replace human intellectual responsibility in research and scholarly publishing.

AI systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors because they cannot assume authorship responsibilities, approve the final manuscript, declare conflicts of interest, or be held accountable for the integrity of scholarly work.

All individuals involved in the publication process remain fully responsible for their decisions and actions regardless of whether AI technologies have been used as supporting tools.

2. Policy for Authors

Authors may use AI tools on a limited basis to assist with:

  • grammar, spelling, and sentence structure;

  • improving manuscript readability;

  • language translation;

  • technical formatting or document organization;

  • other technical assistance that does not replace the author's intellectual contribution.

Authors remain fully responsible for all aspects of the manuscript, including the accuracy of data, research methods, analyses, interpretation of results, scholarly arguments, citations, references, and conclusions.

AI must not be used to:

  • generate or manipulate research data and present it as authentic empirical data;

  • fabricate, falsify, or alter research findings;

  • generate unverifiable or fabricated references;

  • replace the substantive scientific analysis and reasoning expected from the authors;

  • facilitate fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other forms of research misconduct;

  • produce the substantive content of an entire manuscript without adequate intellectual contribution from the authors.

Authors must independently verify all AI-assisted content because AI systems may generate inaccurate, incomplete, biased, or fabricated information and references.

3. Disclosure of AI Use

When Generative AI has been used substantively in preparing a manuscript, authors must disclose its use transparently.

The disclosure should include:

  1. the name or type of AI tool used;

  2. the purpose for which it was used;

  3. the part or stage of the research or writing process in which it was used; and

  4. confirmation that all AI-generated outputs were reviewed and verified by the authors.

AI use limited solely to routine spelling, grammar, or basic formatting assistance may be exempt from disclosure when it does not materially affect the scholarly substance of the manuscript.

Example disclosure:

“The authors used [name of AI tool] to assist with language editing and improve manuscript readability. All AI-generated outputs were reviewed, verified, and revised by the authors. The authors take full responsibility for the final content of the manuscript.”

AI must not be listed as an author and should not be used as a substitute for primary scholarly sources.

4. AI-Generated Images, Data, and Research Materials

The use of AI to generate or modify images, illustrations, datasets, code, or other research materials must be transparently disclosed when such use has a substantive effect on the research methodology or findings.

Authors must not use AI to manipulate images or data in a manner that could mislead readers regarding the actual conditions or outcomes of the research.

When AI is part of the research methodology, its use must be adequately described in the Methods section to allow readers to understand and evaluate the procedure.

5. AI-Generated Content Screening

The journal may use AI-detection tools or other screening methods as part of its editorial screening process.

AI-generated content detection results are treated only as preliminary indicators and will not be used as the sole basis for determining misconduct or rejecting a manuscript.

The journal does not regard any single AI-detection percentage as automatic proof of inappropriate AI use. AI-detection results must be interpreted cautiously because accuracy may vary among tools and false-positive and false-negative classifications may occur.

Where screening indicates potentially inappropriate AI use, editors may request clarification from the authors, require manuscript revision, request an AI-use disclosure, or conduct further editorial examination.

Final editorial decisions will continue to be based on human assessment of scientific quality, transparency, research integrity, originality, and compliance with publication ethics.

6. Policy for Editors

Editors may use AI tools on a limited basis for administrative or technical support that does not replace editorial or scientific judgment.

AI must not replace the editor's assessment of:

  • the manuscript's relevance to the journal's aims and scope;

  • research quality and novelty;

  • methodological validity;

  • quality of analysis and scientific argumentation;

  • decisions to accept, revise, or reject a manuscript.

Editors are responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of unpublished manuscripts.

Editors must not upload manuscripts, research data, author identities, or other confidential information to AI services where such information may be stored, reused, or processed in ways that could compromise editorial confidentiality.

All final editorial decisions must be made by human editors, who remain accountable for those decisions.

7. Policy for Reviewers

Reviewers must not use Generative AI to analyze, evaluate, summarize, or generate peer-review comments when doing so would replace the reviewer's own scientific assessment.

Manuscripts submitted for peer review are confidential documents. Reviewers must not upload all or part of an unpublished manuscript to external Generative AI services because doing so may compromise confidentiality, intellectual property rights, and author data protection.

The evaluation of methodology, novelty, analysis, validity of findings, and scholarly contribution must be conducted by the reviewer.

Reviewers remain fully responsible for all comments and recommendations submitted to the editor.

8. Violations of This Policy

Where inappropriate or undisclosed use of AI is identified, the journal may take actions proportionate to the nature and severity of the issue, including:

  • requesting clarification from the authors;

  • requiring manuscript corrections or revision;

  • requiring an AI-use declaration;

  • terminating the peer-review process;

  • rejecting the manuscript;

  • retracting a published article in cases of serious misconduct;

  • taking other editorial actions in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies.

AI use associated with fabrication, falsification, data manipulation, fabricated references, plagiarism, or deliberate concealment of AI use that materially affects the integrity of the manuscript may constitute publication misconduct.

9. Final Responsibility

The use of AI does not reduce the responsibility of authors, editors, or reviewers for maintaining the integrity of scholarly publishing.

Authors are responsible for the content of submitted and published articles. Editors are responsible for editorial decisions. Reviewers are responsible for their scientific assessments.

AI technologies may serve only as supporting tools and must not replace human judgment, reasoning, responsibility, and accountability in scholarly communication.