Core Principles and Responsibilities of Authors in the Use of Generative AI
Authorship and Accountability:
Under no circumstances should generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools be identified as authors or co-authors of an academic manuscript. Authors assume full responsibility for the content, accuracy, and originality of the submitted work. The use of AI tools does not relieve authors of their scientific, ethical, and intellectual responsibilities. The journal strictly prohibits the use of AI to create false authorship or falsify identity.
Transparency and Disclosure:
Any use of AI tools during research, writing, or processes must be clearly and transparently disclosed in the manuscript. This disclosure should be included in the "Methods" or "Acknowledgements" section, as appropriate. The disclosure should clearly state the full names and version numbers of the AI tools used, along with a detailed explanation of how and for what purposes these tools were used.
Productive AI Use Policies for Editors
Privacy and Intellectual Property Responsibility:
Editors should not upload unpublished manuscripts, associated files, images, or related information to AI tools. Maintaining the confidentiality of submitted content and protecting authors' intellectual property rights are fundamental responsibilities of editors.
AI Use in the Editorial Review Process:
Editors may use AI tools in certain aspects of the editorial workflow (such as initial eligibility screening or reviewer selection) only with the explicit approval of journal management. Any such use of AI should be transparently communicated to authors.
Management of Suspected Misuse:
In cases of uncertainty or concerns regarding AI use, editors should communicate transparently with authors and, where appropriate, request supporting evidence. Issues requiring further review should be referred to journal management for formal review.
Evaluation of Authors' Statements Regarding AI Use:
Editors are expected to carefully review authors' statements regarding the use of AI tools and, where appropriate, request clarification or additional information. It is the editors' responsibility to assess whether the declared use of AI complies with the journal's established policies.
Staying Aware of Policy Developments:
Editors should be aware of ongoing developments in generative AI technologies and ensure they are aware of the journal's evolving policies regarding AI use.
Generative AI Use Policies for Reviewers
Identifying AI Use:
Reviewers are encouraged to identify any potential undisclosed use of AI in the manuscripts they review and to inform editors if such instances are suspected. However, such assessments should be based on clear and objective review standards.
Confidentiality and Ethical Responsibilities:
Reviewers should not, under any circumstances, upload unpublished manuscripts or related documents submitted for peer review to generative AI platforms. Doing so could compromise confidentiality and potentially violate intellectual property rights. Review processes should be conducted using the reviewer's own expertise and knowledge.
Review Ethics:
Reviewers should evaluate authors' use of AI impartially, ensuring that personal opinions or biases do not interfere with the journal's established policies. Any feedback or criticism regarding AI use should be constructive and consistent with the journal's official guidelines.
Permitted Uses
Conceptual Diagrams and Illustrative Visuals
Generative AI can be used to visually illustrate theoretical ideas, conceptual frameworks, or processes. Any visuals generated in this way must faithfully represent the author's own understanding and explanations.
Data Visualization
Authors can use AI tools to enhance the visual presentation of research data. These tools can be particularly useful for improving the clarity and design of graphs, charts, and tables.
Illustrations and Representational Visuals
AI-generated visuals can be used to create explanatory or symbolic representations that explain and simplify complex ideas. Such visuals should support reader understanding and not distort or misrepresent the concepts being explained.
Restricted or Prohibited Areas for the Use of AI
Content Generation
Using AI to generate key sections of an academic manuscript, such as an abstract, introduction, literature review, or discussion, is considered inappropriate. AI-generated content should be treated only as preliminary drafts or proposals and should be thoroughly reviewed, revised, and improved by the author(s) to ensure academic rigor and originality.
Generating and Interpreting Research Results
AI tools should not be used to generate, report, or interpret research findings. Responsibility for the accuracy, scope, and validity of data analysis and interpretation rests solely with the author(s).
Referencing and Citation
Using AI tools to generate fabricated, unverifiable, or nonexistent references is strictly prohibited. All cited sources must be verifiable, properly referenced, and approved by the author(s) in accordance with academic standards.
Academic Writing and Argumentation
Developing the article's core arguments, theoretical contributions, and main theses is the sole responsibility of the author(s). AI can only serve as a supplementary aid in the writing process and should not replace the author's critical reasoning or original academic contribution.
Procedures for Policy Violations
Failure to disclose the use of AI tools or using them in violation of the stated guidelines may result in the rejection of the manuscript during the review process. If a policy violation is discovered after publication, corrective actions may include retraction of the article or publication of a formal correction. Repeated or serious violations of this policy may lead to rejection of future submissions to the journal by the author(s).