The use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in scientific publishing is rapidly increasing. While these technologies can assist researchers in idea generation and development, language correction, and data analysis, they also necessitate new regulations regarding originality, accuracy, transparency, and ethical responsibilities. This policy has been prepared to clarify the acceptable boundaries for the use of generative AI in submissions to our journal and to outline the responsibilities of authors, editors, and reviewers.
Key Principles And Responsibilities For Authors Regarding Generative Artificial Intelligence Usage
Generative artificial intelligence tools (GAITs) (e.g., ChatGPT, Gemini, Deepseek, Grok, DALL-E, etc.) cannot, under any circumstances, be listed as an author or co-author.
o Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and scientific integrity of all content in the manuscript.
o The use of GAITs does not exempt authors from their scientific or ethical responsibilities.
o Any use of GAITs (text, figures, visuals, code generation, etc.) must be clearly and explicitly described in the manuscript, typically in the “Methods” or “Acknowledgments” section.
o The AI tool used, including its name, version number, purpose, and contribution, must be detailed in the disclosure.
Permitted Usage Areas
o GAITs may be used to improve readability (e.g., spelling, grammar, punctuation, and flow) of texts without altering the original scientific content, provided that academic rigor and ethical standards are maintained.
o GAITs may serve as an assistant in generating research questions and planning studies. However, the conceptual framework of the research must fundamentally be developed by the researcher based on their scientific perspective.
o GAITs may be used to assist in coding, but authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy and appropriateness of statistical analyses.
o GAITs can be used as an auxiliary tool for organizing and classifying literature, but the comprehensiveness and correctness of the literature review remain the responsibility of the authors.
Restricted and Prohibited Usage Areas
o The complete creation of main manuscript sections (e.g., abstract, introduction, discussion, or conclusion) by GAITs is not permitted.
o Outputs generated by GAITs must be used as drafts, thoroughly evaluated, modified, and verified by the authors.
o Generation, reporting, or interpretation of research results by GAITs is not allowed.
o The accuracy and validity of data analysis results are entirely the responsibility of the authors.
o Creating non-existent or unverifiable references by GAITs and citing them in the manuscript is strictly prohibited.
o Authors are responsible for the accuracy and proper use of all references and citations.
Plagiarism Control and Data Security
o Generative AI outputs may contain fabricated or incorrect information and may carry a risk of plagiarism. All content must be carefully reviewed and verified by the authors.
o Uploading personal, sensitive, or confidential data to GAITs may threaten data security. Authors must review the privacy policies of the generative AI tools they use and take necessary precautions.

Actions in Case of Violation of the Generative Artificial Intelligence Usage Policy
o Failure to disclose or misrepresentation of GAIT use may result in the rejection of the manuscript.
o If a policy violation is detected in published articles, procedures such as retraction or correction may be applied.
o Repeated violations may result in the non-acceptance of the author’s future submissions.

Key Principles And Responsibilities For Editors Regarding Generative Artificial Intelligence Usage
o Editors must not upload unpublished manuscripts or related files, figures, or information to generative AI tools.
o Protecting authors’ intellectual property rights and manuscript confidentiality is a core responsibility of editors.
o Editors may use GAITs in the manuscript evaluation process (e.g., suitability checks, reviewer selection) only as permitted by the journal management.
o Authors must be informed of any GAIT usage.
o Editors are responsible for assessing the appropriateness of GAIT use in accordance with journal policies.
o Editors should carefully review authors’ disclosures regarding GAIT usage and request additional information if necessary.
o In cases of suspicion regarding GAIT usage, editors should discuss the issue with the authors and, if necessary, request supporting evidence.
o Cases requiring further evaluation should be reported to the journal management.
o Editors should regularly monitor developments in GAIT usage and updates to the journal’s policy.
Key Principles And Responsibilities For Reviewers Regarding Generative Artificial Intelligence Usage
o Reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts or related files, figures, or information to generative AI tools.
o Such practices pose risks to authors’ intellectual property rights and manuscript confidentiality.
o Reviewers should refrain from using GAITs during the manuscript evaluation process.
o The evaluation process must be conducted based on the reviewer’s own scientific expertise.
o Reviewers should attempt to detect any possible use of GAITs during evaluation and report suspicious cases to the editor.
o Detection of AI usage must be objective.
o Reviewers may use generative AI tools only to improve the grammar, spelling, and readability of their own evaluation reports.
o The accuracy and integrity of the evaluation report remain the responsibility of the reviewer.



Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence for Figures, Graphs, and Tables
Our journal adopts a technology-forward approach. The potential of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) technologies in creating figures, graphs, and tables is rapidly increasing, and these tools can contribute to academic research. However, to maintain scientific integrity and ethical standards, the following general principles and policy apply:
o Figures, graphs, and tables generated using GAI must be clearly and explicitly disclosed.
o The name of the GAI tool used, its version number, and purpose must be detailed below the respective figure, graph, or table.
o Authors are fully responsible for the scientific accuracy and appropriateness of visuals created with GAI.
o All generated visuals must reflect research results and the author’s own scientific understanding.
Permitted Usage Areas
o GAI may be used to visualize conceptual models, processes, or theoretical frameworks.
o Visuals created in this way must accurately reflect the authors’ scientific understanding.
o Authors are encouraged to use GAI to visualize their own research data.
o GAI may be used to enhance the quality and design of figures, graphs, and tables.
o In the field of educational sciences, GAI can be used to create representative illustrations or diagrams to explain concepts.
o Visuals created in this way should aid readers’ understanding of concepts and must not be misleading.
Cautionary Notes
o Ensure the accuracy of data presented in figures, graphs, or tables.
o GAI should assist only in data visualization and must not generate new data.
o When creating images representing real events or situations, it must be clearly stated that they are representative illustrations.
o Visuals generated by GAI must comply with ethical standards and must not contain misleading or discriminatory content.