1. Fundamental Principles and Responsibilities for the Use of Generative AI by Authors

• Generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools cannot be cited as authors or co-authors under any circumstances.
• The originality, accuracy, and scientific validity of all content in articles are entirely the responsibility of the authors.
• The use of generative AI does not eliminate authors' scientific and ethical responsibilities.
• Listing AI tools as authors is considered an ethical violation and may result in article rejection or retraction.

• The name of the tool used (e.g. ChatGPT, GrammarlyGO, Copilot, etc.)
• Version number (if applicable)
• Purpose and scope of use (e.g. language editing, code assistance, literature summarisation, etc.)

A separate declaration is not required for tools used solely for language, spelling, punctuation, or formatting purposes.

2. Permitted Areas of Use

• It is acceptable for authors to use AI tools for grammar, narrative fluency, and formal editing purposes in their own texts.
• These edits should not alter the scientific content of the text, but only improve its readability.

• AI tools may be used as an aid in generating research ideas or preparing a work plan.
• However, the scientific framework, methods, and interpretations of the work must be shaped entirely by the authors' original contributions.

• AI-supported tools may be used in writing data processing, analysis, or visualisation code.
• Such uses must be declared; the accuracy, validity, and appropriateness of the results are the author's responsibility.

• AI tools may be used as auxiliary tools in classifying, summarising, or thematically organising the literature.
• However, the accuracy of literature interpretations and citations is entirely the responsibility of the author.

3. Restricted or Prohibited Areas of Use

• The abstract, introduction, literature review, findings, discussion, or conclusion sections of an article should not be generated entirely by generative AI.
• AI may only assist in idea generation or initial draft preparation; the final text must be edited, verified, and developed by the human author.

• Generative AI tools may not be used to create, report, or interpret experimental or analytical results.
• The full scientific validity of data analyses is the responsibility of the authors.

• It is strictly prohibited to create fabricated, unverified, or non-existent sources using Generative AI.
• All citations must be manually verified by the author and sourced from reliable sources.

• The development of the theoretical framework, argument, and discussion sections must be entirely the academic contribution of the authors.
• AI can only provide limited support at these stages; it cannot produce the main content.

4. Policy on the Use of AI in Creating Visuals, Graphics, and Tables

• If generative AI has been used in the creation of visuals, graphics, or tables, this must be stated below the visual or in its description.
• The name, version, and purpose of use of the tool used must be clearly stated.

• The scientific accuracy and appropriateness of all generated visuals are the responsibility of the authors.
• Visuals representing research data or containing experimental results that are entirely generated by AI are only accepted with the editor's approval.

1. Conceptual Diagrams/Schemes: May be used to explain theoretical models, but must accurately reflect the author's original interpretation.
2. Data Visualisation: AI may be used to convert existing data into graphs or tables; the data must be verified by the author.
3. Representational/Explanatory Images: Images supporting conceptual explanations may be created, but they must not be misleading to the reader.

5. Policy on the Use of Generative AI for Editors

• Editors must not upload unpublished manuscripts or data to generative AI tools in any way.
• Article confidentiality and the protection of authors' intellectual property rights are fundamental responsibilities.

• Editorial decisions should be based solely on human judgement.
• AI tools may only be used in authorised processes such as eligibility checks, language checks, or referee assignment support.
• Authors should be informed of any AI usage.

• Editors should carefully review authors' declarations regarding AI use and request additional clarification when necessary.
• It is the editor's responsibility to assess whether the use complies with this policy.

• In unclear cases, authors may be asked to provide additional evidence or clarification.
• Serious ethical concerns are evaluated by the Journal Editorial Board.

• Editors are responsible for regularly monitoring developments in generative AI technologies and updates to journal policies.

6. Generative AI Usage Policy for Reviewers

• Reviewers must not upload manuscripts submitted for review to generative AI tools under any circumstances.
• Such actions are considered breaches of confidentiality and intellectual property.

• Reviewers should rely on their own scientific expertise during the review process; they should not have AI perform the review.

• If undeclared AI use is detected, the situation should be reported to the editor with supporting evidence.

• Reviewers should be fair, objective, and impartial in their assessments regarding AI use.
• Personal opinions or biases should not override the journal's ethical policies.

7. Procedures to be Applied in Case of Policy Violation

• Articles may be rejected if the use of generative AI is not disclosed or if it is used in a manner contrary to this policy.
• If a violation is detected in published articles, the journal may initiate a retraction or correction process.
• Repeated violations may result in the rejection of future submissions by the authors concerned and, if deemed necessary, notification of their institutions.

8. Updating the Policy

• This policy is reviewed at least once a year by the Editorial Board in line with rapid developments in generative AI technologies. New versions come into effect on the date they are published on the journal's website.