Artificial Intelligence Policy

The journal recognises that generative AI tools can assist in preparing research, and requires that their use be responsible and disclosed, with full scholarly responsibility remaining with humans. This policy follows the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

For authors

  • AI is not an author: no tool may be listed as an author, as it cannot take responsibility for the work.
  • Permitted: improving language and style, and summarising text the authors wrote themselves, with full human review.
  • Not permitted: generating or altering data or results, fabricating participants' responses, creating or manipulating scientific images and figures, or writing the analysis and conclusions on the authors' behalf. The exception is where AI is itself part of the research method, provided it is fully described in the methodology section.
  • Checking references: authors verify every reference and fact produced by a tool.
  • Responsibility: authors are fully responsible for the accuracy and originality of the work.

Disclosure

A section titled "Declaration of AI use" is added before the reference list, naming the tool, its version and the purpose of use. Spelling and grammar checkers and reference managers need not be disclosed.

Sample statement: "The authors used [tool name and version] to improve the language of parts of this article. They reviewed and edited the output and take full responsibility for the content of the article."

For reviewers

  • Reviewers must not upload the manuscript, or any part of it, to an AI tool, to protect confidentiality and the authors' rights.
  • The review report must not be written, nor the evaluation formed, by an AI tool.
  • Reviewers may improve the language of their own report without entering any of the manuscript's content.

For editors

  • The editorial board observes the same confidentiality, and acceptance and rejection decisions remain entirely human.
  • The journal may use similarity and AI-text detection tools as an aid, not as conclusive evidence, and authors are given the opportunity to explain before any action is taken.

Breaches

If undisclosed or impermissible use is established, the journal asks the authors for an explanation; the outcome may be rejection, correction, or retraction after publication, following COPE guidance.