For Authors

The Artificial Intelligence (AI) policy has been established to inform authors about the ethical and responsible use of AI technologies in the writing and analysis of academic manuscripts. Grounded in the principles of data privacy, academic integrity, and ethical responsibility, this policy seeks to enhance the reliability of scholarly work while ensuring respect for the rights of individuals and communities. Scientific research must serve the benefit of humanity, remain free from bias and intentional errors, and be utilized in ways that advance knowledge for the common good. Fairness and respect must be shown toward all stakeholders in the research process, including data-providing individuals or communities, other living beings, and the environment.

The journal recognizes the value of AI and its potential to support authors in the research and writing process. We welcome technological advancements that facilitate idea generation, accelerate discoveries, synthesize or analyze findings, improve language, or help structure presentations. Large Language Models (LLMs) and generative AI tools provide transformative opportunities for research and dissemination. However, they cannot replicate human creativity or critical thinking. This policy aims to guide authors, reviewers, and editors in making appropriate ethical decisions regarding the use of such technologies.

Researchers bear full responsibility and accountability for any content generated with AI tools. They must verify the neutrality, accuracy, and reliability of outputs, as this forms part of their legal and ethical obligations. Any use of AI tools capable of generating content—including references, text, images, or other forms of material—must be disclosed by the authors. Primary sources should always be cited rather than AI tools themselves. If a manuscript is created wholly or in part using AI, this must be explicitly stated at submission to allow the editorial team to evaluate the content accordingly. AI usage must be clearly acknowledged both within the manuscript and in the final published version. Authors should specify which AI functions were used, at which stages of research, and to what extent. The versions and technical details of the AI tools employed must also be reported. Such transparency fosters trust among authors, readers, reviewers, and editors.

AI systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors, nor cited as sources, as they do not currently meet the criteria for authorship. Authorship entails responsibility, which cannot be meaningfully attributed to AI systems. Likewise, AI tools should not appear in the references section. Authors must carefully check the accuracy, validity, and appropriateness of all content and citations generated by AI. They must remain vigilant about potential plagiarism, fabricated information, or non-existent references. Before submission, authors are responsible for verifying all claims made in the manuscript.

AI Assistance
We acknowledge the growing accessibility of AI-assisted writing tools. Applications that provide suggestions to improve grammar, language, or structure are considered supportive AI tools and do not require disclosure. Authors remain solely responsible for ensuring that their manuscripts are accurate and uphold rigorous scholarly standards. Authors may use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies to enhance readability and improve language quality. When AI tools are used solely for editing purposes, disclosure is not necessary. In this context, “text editing” refers to improvements in readability, style, grammar, spelling, and punctuation through AI-assisted technologies. Such enhancements may alter phrasing or formatting but do not constitute substantive or autonomous content generation.

In all cases, human oversight is essential. The final responsibility for the manuscript rests with the authors, who must ensure that any edits reflect their original work. Since AI tools may produce incomplete, erroneous, or biased outputs, results must always be verified by the authors. The editor reserves the right to reject a submission at any stage of the publication process if generative AI is found to have been used inappropriately. “Inappropriate use of generative AI” includes but is not limited to the production of inaccurate content, plagiarism, or improper citation of prior sources

Use of AI in Images and Visual Data
The rapid development of generative AI in image production has raised new concerns regarding copyright and research integrity. Submissions containing AI-generated or AI-modified images will not be accepted. Only adjustments to brightness, contrast, and color are permitted, provided that no information is obscured. Where necessary, forensic tools may be employed to detect inconsistencies in visual data. The sole exception applies when AI use forms part of the research methodology. In such cases, the AI tool must be described in detail and in a reproducible manner, including relevant technical information (e.g., model name, version, and developer).

Use in Artistic Content:
Generative AI must not be used to produce visual content such as graphical abstracts. For cover art, AI-generated content may be permitted only with prior approval from the editor and publisher, if all necessary rights have been cleared and proper attribution is ensured.

For Reviewers

When a researcher is invited to review another researcher’s manuscript, the submitted paper must be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers should not upload the manuscript, in whole or in part, to generative AI tools, as doing so may violate the author’s confidentiality and intellectual property rights. If the manuscript contains personal data, this may also constitute a breach of data privacy rights. This confidentiality obligation also applies to the peer review report, as it may include sensitive information related to the manuscript and its authors. Therefore, peer review reports should not be uploaded to AI tools, even for the sole purpose of improving language or readability. The peer review process is a cornerstone of the scientific ecosystem, and the journal adheres to the highest ethical standards in this regard. Reviewing a scientific manuscript involves responsibilities that can only be carried out by humans. Generative AI tools lack the critical thinking and original judgment required for scientific evaluation and may produce inaccurate, incomplete, or biased assessments. Reviewers are personally responsible and accountable for the entire content of their review reports. It is essential that any AI-based technologies used to support the editorial process are implemented with attention to confidentiality and data protection principles.

For Editors

A submitted manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Editors should not upload the manuscript, in whole or in part, to generative AI tools, as doing so may violate the author’s confidentiality, proprietary rights, and—if applicable—personal data protection. This obligation of confidentiality also applies to all communications related to the manuscript (e.g., notification and decision letters), which must likewise not be uploaded to AI tools. Editorial evaluation involves responsibilities that can only be carried out by humans. Generative AI lacks the critical thinking and independent judgment required for this process and may produce inaccurate, incomplete, or biased results. Editors are responsible and accountable for the evaluation process, the final decision, and its communication to the authors. If an editor suspects that an author or reviewer has violated these rules, they should inform the publisher. AI-based technologies that support the editorial process should be used with care and must respect confidentiality and data protection rights.

Given the rapid pace of developments expected in this field, we will review this policy regularly and make adjustments as needed.

References:

1. Turkish Republic Higher Education Council Higher Education Institutions Ethical Guide on the Use of Generative AI in Scientific Research and Publication Activities (for English Summary click here)
2. Elsevier Generative AI policies for journals

3. Springer Nature Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

4. Sage Journal Artificial Intelligence Policy