Ethical Principles and Operational Guidelines for the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Academic Publishing
1. Author Responsibilities and Ethical Obligations
Authorship Status: Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools shall not be designated as "authors" or "co-authors" in academic works. Since authorship entails substantial intellectual contribution and legal accountability, including such tools in the author list is contrary to scientific publication ethics.
Principle of Sole Responsibility: The human author(s) bear exclusive responsibility for the content, data accuracy, originality, and scientific integrity of the submitted work. The use of AI does not absolve authors of their ethical and scientific accountability.
Identity and Originality: The use of AI for the purpose of creating pseudo-authorship or manipulating academic identity is strictly prohibited; such actions are categorized as scientific misconduct.
2. Transparency and Disclosure Requirements
Mandatory Disclosure: Any AI tools utilized during the research design, data analysis, or manuscript preparation phases must be explicitly disclosed within the article.
Reporting Standards: Such declarations must be detailed in the "Methodology" or "Acknowledgements" section, specifying the full name of the tool, version number, purpose of use, and the specific processes involved.
3. Use of AI in Editorial Processes
Confidentiality and Data Security: Editors shall not upload unpublished manuscripts, associated images, or supplementary files into AI platforms. Such actions constitute a breach of the authors' intellectual property rights and confidentiality agreements.
Editorial Decision-Making: AI tools may only be utilized as auxiliary instruments in logistical processes—such as preliminary screening, linguistic auditing, or reviewer matching—subject to the approval of the journal management. This usage must be transparently communicated to the authors.
Misconduct Management: In instances of ethical suspicion regarding AI usage, editors are obligated to request supporting data and clarification from the authors. Cases requiring further investigation shall be referred to executive boards or ethics committees.
4. Peer Review and Ethical Conduct
Cognitive Independence: The evaluation process must rely on the reviewer’s own expertise and intellectual judgment. Generating peer-review reports through AI tools is a violation of evaluation ethics.
Breach of Confidentiality: Reviewers must not, under any circumstances, upload confidential materials provided for review into AI systems.
Detection and Notification: Reviewers are encouraged to identify undisclosed AI usage within the text based on objective criteria and must notify the editor of such suspicions.
5. Permissible Operational Applications
Conceptual and Visual Representation: AI tools may be employed to visualize theoretical frameworks, process models, or conceptual diagrams. However, it is essential that these visuals accurately reflect the author’s original arguments without distortion.
Data Visualization Design: AI support may be utilized to enhance the aesthetic and technical presentation of existing research data, such as charts and tables, to improve clarity.
Symbolic Illustrations: Representational visuals that concretize complex phenomena may be used provided they facilitate reader comprehension and do not misrepresent the described concepts.
6. Restricted and Prohibited Activities
Textual Content Generation: Substantial sections of the manuscript (e.g., Abstract, Introduction, Literature Review, Discussion, and Conclusion) should not be generated directly by AI. AI-generated outputs must be treated only as drafts or suggestions; the final text must be critically reviewed, restructured, and rewritten by the author(s) to ensure scientific rigor and originality.
Synthesis and Interpretation of Findings: AI tools shall not be used to generate, report, or interpret research results. The validity, scope, and accuracy of empirical findings remain the sole responsibility of the author(s).
Bibliographic Manipulation: The use of fabricated (hallucinated), unverifiable, or non-existent citations generated by AI is strictly prohibited. All references must be verified, accessible, and cited in accordance with academic standards.
Substitution of Critical Thinking: While AI may serve as a linguistic aid (editing), it cannot substitute for the author’s original academic contribution, analytical depth, or core thesis development.
7. Sanctions in Case of Policy Violation
In the event of a failure to comply with these guidelines or the detection of misleading declarations:
Manuscripts currently under review will be rejected.
For published works, corrective measures such as an erratum or retraction will be implemented.
Serious or recurrent violations may lead to restrictions on future submissions by the author(s) to the journal.