Ankara Review of European Studies
Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI)

1. Purpose and Scope

The Ankara Review of European Studies (ARES) is committed to human-centred scholarly production grounded in accuracy, transparency, accountability, and ethical oversight. This policy sets out the principles governing the responsible use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) tools across the journal’s processes, including authorship, editorial work, peer review, and data and visual production.
This policy has been prepared in alignment with the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).
The term Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) refers to large language models (LLMs) or multimodal systems capable of generating text, images, audio, code, or data (e.g. ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot, Midjourney, DALL·E, Jasper AI, Runway, etc.).

2. Principles of Use for Authors

2.1 Acceptable Uses

• Authors may use GAI tools within the following limits:
• As assistive tools for language, grammar, spelling, and stylistic editing,
• As support tools for developing title, abstract, or visual ideas,
• In code writing, statistical analysis, or data visualisation processes, provided that these are conducted under full human supervision,
• For classification or summarisation purposes in literature reviews,
• For the creation of conceptual or explanatory diagrams or schematics, provided that such use is explicitly disclosed.

2.2 Unacceptable Uses

The use of GAI tools by authors in the following cases constitutes an ethical violation:

• Generation by GAI of the core sections of the manuscript, including the abstract, introduction, methodology, findings, discussion, or conclusion,
• Creation of scientific arguments, analyses, or interpretations by GAI,
• Production of unverifiable sources, data, or citations,
• Presentation of fabricated or manipulative visuals, tables, or synthetic data,
• Direct use of GAI outputs without meaningful human review and control.

Authors bear full scientific and ethical responsibility for the entire content of their manuscripts, including any parts produced with the assistance of GAI tools.

3. Principles of Use for Editors and Reviewers

3.1 Editors

In accordance with confidentiality, copyright, and data security requirements, editors:

• May not upload any files submitted by authors or reviewers to GAI systems,
• May use GAI tools solely for formal or technical purposes (e.g. spelling or formatting checks), under human supervision and with the knowledge of the journal’s management,
• Shall carefully review AI usage declarations and may request additional clarification or suspend the review process in cases of concern.

3.2 Reviewers

Reviewers:

• Conduct their evaluations based on their own scholarly expertise,
• May not upload manuscripts, visuals, or supplementary files under review to any GAI system,
• May not generate or summarise peer review reports using GAI tools,
• Are obliged to inform the editor if they detect suspected improper use of GAI.

4. Disclosure Obligation

Regardless of the purpose for which GAI tools are used, authors are required to disclose such use clearly and accurately. Disclosure is made through the Artificial Intelligence Usage Declaration Form uploaded during manuscript submission and must include:

• The name and version of the tool used,
• The purpose of use (e.g. language editing, visualisation, data analysis),
• A statement describing how the output was reviewed and affirming that final responsibility rests with the author(s).

Misleading, incomplete, or absent disclosures may result in:

• Rejection or retraction of the manuscript,
• Exclusion of the author from consideration in future submissions,
• Notification of the relevant institution, where necessary.

5. Ethical Principles and Sanctions

ARES adopts the following ethical principles regarding the use of GAI:

• Transparency: Clear disclosure of any use,
  
• Integrity: Author responsibility for the accuracy of all content,
• Scholarly Rigor: Preservation of human intellectual contribution at the core,
• Fairness and Respect: Full respect for scholarly labour and copyright,
• Confidentiality: No transfer of editorial content outside the review process,
• Accountability: Direct responsibility of users in cases of ethical breach.

Sanctions

• For authors: Rejection, retraction, or publication bans in cases of non-disclosure or unethical use of GAI.
  
• For editors/reviewers: Removal from duties and notification of the relevant institution in cases of confidentiality breaches or GAI-generated reports.

6. Review and Monitoring

This policy is reviewed at least once annually in line with developments in GAI technologies and scholarly publishing practices. In accordance with COPE principles, ARES aims to ensure that the use of GAI does not undermine scholarly integrity and is conducted in a responsible and ethical manner.

COPE Council. COPE position – Authorship and AI – English. https://doi.org/10.24318/cCVRZBms