Artificial Intelligence Usage Policy

POLICY ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) AND GENERATIVE AI IN SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING

1. Purpose

This policy establishes guidelines governing the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), including Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI), in the preparation, submission, editing, peer review, and publication of scholarly articles. The policy aims to ensure that AI is used transparently, responsibly, and ethically; that academic integrity is maintained; that manuscript confidentiality is protected; and that AI does not replace human responsibility or scholarly judgment.

This policy is based on the principles of transparency and human accountability promoted by international scholarly publishers and publication-ethics organizations and takes into consideration Scopus expectations for journals to establish clear policies regarding the use of GenAI in scholarly publishing.

2. Scope

This policy applies to:

  1. Authors;
  2. Editors and the Editorial Team;
  3. Peer Reviewers;
  4. Editorial staff and other personnel involved in the publication process.

3. General Principles

The use of AI in scholarly publishing shall comply with the following principles:

  1. Human Accountability – Humans remain fully responsible for the content, accuracy, integrity, and scholarly decisions associated with a publication.
  2. Transparency—Substantive use of AI must be clearly disclosed.
  3. Confidentiality—Manuscripts, research data, reviewer reports, author identities, editorial correspondence, and other confidential information must not be entered into AI systems that may retain, reuse, or use such information for model training.
  4. Academic Integrity – AI must not be used to fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or misrepresent research data, findings, citations, images, or other scholarly information.
  5. Originality – AI must not replace the author's original intellectual contribution.
  6. Verification – All AI-generated or AI-assisted outputs must be critically reviewed and verified by a human before being used.

4. Policy for Authors

4.1 Permitted Use of AI

Authors may use AI or AI-assisted tools responsibly and to a limited extent to assist with:

  1. grammar, spelling, punctuation, and language correction;
  2. improving readability and clarity;
  3. improving the structure and organization of the manuscript;
  4. brainstorming or developing ideas;
  5. translation, provided that the translated content is subsequently reviewed and edited by the authors;
  6. other technical or supportive tasks that do not replace the author's intellectual contribution, analysis, or scholarly judgment.

The use of AI must not replace critical thinking, scientific analysis, interpretation, or the author's intellectual contribution. Authors remain fully responsible for the entire content of their manuscript.

4.2 Mandatory Disclosure

Authors must disclose the use of AI when AI has made a substantive contribution to the preparation or development of the manuscript, particularly when AI has been used to generate or substantially modify text, structure, analysis, figures, tables, or other elements incorporated into the manuscript.

The disclosure should, at minimum, identify:

  • The name of the AI tool used;
  • The purpose for which it was used;
  • The section or stage of manuscript preparation affected;
  • Confirmation that the AI-generated output was reviewed and verified by the authors; and
  • Confirmation that the authors retain full responsibility for the final content of the article.

4.3 Recommended AI Disclosure Statement

Authors may use the following statement:

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies: During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [NAME OF AI TOOL] for [PURPOSE OF USE]. The author(s) subsequently reviewed, verified, and edited the output and take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and final content of the manuscript.

4.4 Prohibited Uses of AI by Authors

Authors must not:

  1. List AI as an author, co-author, or contributor with authorship status;
  2. Use AI to generate research data and subsequently report such data as empirical research findings without an appropriate scientific basis;
  3. Use AI to fabricate, falsify, or manipulate research results;
  4. Include unverified references, DOIs, citations, or sources generated by AI;
  5. Use AI output as a substitute for the author's intellectual contribution;
  6. Use AI to conceal plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct;
  7. Enter personal data, participant data, confidential research data, or copyrighted material into public AI systems without appropriate rights, consent, and data protection;
  8. Use AI to create misleading, fabricated, or manipulated research images or other visual evidence.

Authors are responsible for verifying the accuracy, completeness, potential bias, references, and copyright or usage rights associated with all AI-generated outputs before incorporating them into the manuscript.

5. Policy for Editors and the Editorial Team

5.1 Editorial Responsibility

Editors and the Editorial Team remain fully responsible for:

  1. Editorial assessment;
  2. Reviewer selection and communication;
  3. Decisions to accept, revise, or reject manuscripts;
  4. Implementation of publication-ethics policies;
  5. Protection of manuscript confidentiality; and
  6. Communication of editorial decisions to authors.

AI must not replace editorial judgment, scholarly assessment, or human decision-making. The final editorial decision must always be made by an appropriately authorized human editor.

5.2 Limitations on AI Use by Editors

Editors and editorial team members must not upload unpublished manuscripts, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, personal data, or other confidential information to public AI systems or third-party AI tools that do not provide adequate confidentiality and data-protection safeguards.

AI must not be used to:

  1. Automatically determine whether a manuscript should be accepted or rejected;
  2. Replace the scientific judgment of an editor;
  3. Make editorial decisions based primarily on AI-generated scores or recommendations;
  4. Evaluate the scientific substance of a manuscript as a substitute for human editorial assessment;
  5. Generate editorial decisions or substantive editorial comments without human review and approval; or
  6. Process confidential manuscript information through AI systems that do not provide appropriate security and confidentiality safeguards.

5.3 Permitted Use of AI by the Editorial Team

Subject to human oversight and appropriate data protection, AI may be used in a limited manner for administrative or supportive functions that do not require disclosure of confidential manuscript content, such as:

  • Checking administrative completeness;
  • Organizing non-confidential information;
  • Assisting with general literature searches;
  • Language assistance for non-confidential editorial communications; and
  • Using secure, journal-approved AI systems for specific administrative or editorial-support functions.

Any such use must maintain human oversight, data protection, confidentiality, and editorial accountability.

6. Policy for Peer Reviewers

6.1 Prohibition of AI Use in Peer Review

To protect the independence, confidentiality, and integrity of peer review, Peer Reviewers must not use AI or generative AI to conduct the substantive scientific assessment of manuscripts assigned to them.

Peer reviewers must not:

  1. Upload manuscripts or portions of manuscripts to ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot, or other public AI systems;
  2. Upload tables, figures, datasets, supplementary materials, or author-identifying information to AI systems;
  3. Ask AI to assess the methodology, results, discussion, or conclusions of a manuscript;
  4. Ask AI to recommend an editorial decision such as accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject;
  5. Use AI to generate all or part of the substantive content of a peer-review report;
  6. Enter reviewer comments, editorial communications, or confidential manuscript information into AI systems; or
  7. Rely on AI-generated output as the primary basis for their review or recommendation.

Peer review must be conducted independently by the reviewer based on their own scholarly expertise, critical assessment, and professional judgment.

6.2 Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers must:

  1. Conduct their assessment independently;
  2. Maintain strict confidentiality of the manuscript;
  3. Provide comments based on their relevant scholarly expertise;
  4. Disclose any potential conflict of interest;
  5. Ensure that their recommendations are academically justified and defensible; and
  6. Do not use information obtained through peer review for personal, professional, or research purposes before the information becomes publicly available.

7. AI Disclosure by Editors and Reviewers

Where the journal permits limited AI use for administrative or supportive purposes that does not involve confidential manuscript content, such use should be disclosed to the Editor-in-Chief or the journal.

The following statement may be used:

AI Use Declaration: During the preparation of this editorial/review report, I used [NAME OF AI TOOL] solely for [PURPOSE]. No confidential manuscript content was submitted to the AI tool. I independently conducted the scientific assessment and take full responsibility for the content and recommendations provided.

Basic spelling, grammar, punctuation, or language correction that does not involve substantive content may be exempt from mandatory disclosure, subject to the journal's editorial policy.

8. Violations of This Policy

Improper or undisclosed use of AI may constitute a breach of publication ethics. Depending on the nature and severity of the violation, the journal may take appropriate action, including:

  1. Requesting clarification from the author, editor, or reviewer;
  2. Requiring disclosure or correction of AI use;
  3. Rejecting the manuscript;
  4. Terminating or restarting the peer-review process;
  5. Replacing a reviewer;
  6. Retracting an article if a violation is identified after publication; or
  7. Referring serious cases to the relevant institution or authority when appropriate.

Editorial actions shall be proportionate to the nature of the violation, properly documented, and consistent with principles of fairness, transparency, and publication integrity.

9. Final Statement

AI may be used in scholarly publishing as a supporting tool, but it must never replace human responsibility, scholarly expertise, critical judgment, or intellectual contribution.

Authors are responsible for transparently disclosing substantive AI use and for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of their manuscripts. Editors are responsible for all editorial decisions and must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts. Peer reviewers must conduct peer review independently and must not use AI to evaluate manuscripts or generate the substantive content of peer-review reports.

This policy shall be reviewed periodically to reflect developments in AI technology, international publication-ethics standards, and evolving policies and requirements reputable scholarly publishers.