AI Policy

1. Introduction
Bima Loka: Journal of Physical Education recognises the transformative potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in scholarly publishing. From improving language clarity to facilitating data analysis and automating content creation, AI tools can benefit authors and enhance productivity. However, their use must be carefully managed to uphold academic integrity, originality, transparency, and accountability.

This policy outlines the journal’s position on the ethical and responsible use of AI tools in manuscript preparation. It aims to provide clear boundaries, prevent misunderstandings, and align with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)’s Core Practices and discussion documents on AI in decision-making.

2. Definition of AI Tools
For this policy, AI tools refer to digital systems, platforms, or software that use artificial intelligence techniques—such as machine learning (ML), natural language processing (NLP), and deep learning—to generate, analyse, translate, summarise, or modify textual, numerical, visual, or audio data in a research context.
Examples include, but are not limited to:

  • Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and other large language models (LLMs)
  • Writing and grammar tools such as Grammarly, DeepL Write, and Quillbot
  • AI-based data analysis and visualisation software
  • AI systems are used to create images, graphs, or statistical models
  • Literature review and citation generators powered by AI

3. Acceptable Use of AI Tools
Authors may use AI tools for specific purposes if the following conditions are met:
a. Permissible Uses

  • Grammar checking, spelling, and punctuation correction
  • Improving linguistic clarity, style, and tone
  • Formatting references and citations
  • Conducting initial literature searches
  • Supporting, but not replacing, statistical analysis or modelling
  • Generating basic visual aids or illustrations (if ethically sourced and reviewed)
  • Maximum Turnitin result on AI writing detection: 20%. Authors are required to adjust their manuscripts if the results are more than 20%.

b. Restricted Uses
AI tools must not be used to:

  • Generate entire manuscripts or substantial portions of original content without proper attribution and critical review
  • Fabricate or falsify data, images, or findings
  • Translate texts without human verification
  • Automatically summarise or rephrase published works in a way that constitutes plagiarism
  • Create content that infringes on copyright or reproduces identifiable materials from third parties without permission

4. Responsibilities of Authors
Authors are solely responsible for all content submitted to the journal. This includes content created or modified using AI tools. Authors must:

  • Verify the accuracy, originality, and reliability of all AI-assisted content
  • Ensure the absence of plagiarism, bias, factual errors, or hallucinations
  • Attribute any external data, sources, or identifiable materials used or suggested by AI
  • Accept full responsibility for any errors, omissions, or ethical breaches resulting from AI-assisted work
  • Review and critically edit all outputs from AI tools to ensure they meet scholarly and disciplinary standards

5. Authorship and AI
AI tools cannot be credited as authors or co-authors. Authorship is limited to individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research and can be held accountable for its content.

Including AI tools in the list of authors, author notes, or author contribution statements is strictly prohibited and may result in desk rejection or retraction.

6. Disclosure Requirements
Authors must provide full and transparent disclosure if AI tools were used beyond permissible uses. Disclosure must include:

  • The name, version, and developer or provider of the AI tool used
  • A clear description of the purpose and extent of its use
  • A statement confirming that the authors reviewed and take responsibility for all AI-assisted content

7. Location of Disclosure in Manuscripts
Depending on how the AI tools were used, the disclosure must appear in one or more of the following manuscript sections.

a. Methods Section
If the tool contributed to data analysis, figure generation, coding, or other parts of the research methodology.

b. Acknowledgements Section
If the tool was used to improve writing quality, translation, or formatting.

c. Dedicated Statement Section
Authors are strongly encouraged to include a separate section titled “Declaration of AI Tool Usage” with language such as:

"During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [insert AI tool name (version, and developer)] for [provide a clear description of the purposes and the extent of its use]. All AI-generated outputs were critically reviewed and thoroughly edited by the authors to ensure factual accuracy, clarity of expression, and compliance with academic standards. The authors take full responsibility for the integrity and content of this manuscript.”

8. Editorial and Peer Review Oversight
Editors and peer reviewers will evaluate AI disclosures as part of the manuscript's ethical and methodological assessment. If undisclosed or inappropriate AI use is suspected, the editorial office may:

  • Request clarification or revision from the authors
  • Reject the manuscript
  • Refer the case to the institution or initiate a formal investigation if misconduct is suspected

SJS will not rely solely on automated detection software to assess the origin of content. All assessments will involve human oversight and direct communication with authors.

9. Consequences of Non-Compliance
Failure to comply with this policy may result in:

  • Rejection of the manuscript at any stage of review
  • Retraction of the article after publication
  • Notification of the author’s institution in cases of suspected misconduct
  • Banning future submissions by the author if misuse is severe or repeated

10. Appeals and Dispute Resolution
If an author disputes an editorial decision related to AI usage, they may submit a formal written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief. The appeal must clearly explain the nature of the disagreement, include evidence supporting the claim, and reference this policy. Appeals will be reviewed by an internal ethics panel or referred to an independent COPE consultant if necessary.

11. Use of AI by the Editorial Team
SJS does not use AI tools to make autonomous editorial or peer review decisions. Any future use of AI by the editorial team will be disclosed transparently and will always involve human verification and final decision-making.

12. Policy Updates and Author Guidance
As AI technologies evolve, this policy will be reviewed and updated regularly to reflect new risks, benefits, and community standards. Authors are advised to consult this policy before submitting a manuscript and to contact the editorial office if unsure whether their use of AI tools is compliant.

SJS encourages authors to embrace responsible innovation and remain committed to upholding the principles of ethical research and publication.

13. Ethical Framework and References
This policy is based on ethical guidelines and recommendations from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including

  • COPE Core Practices
  • COPE’s Discussion Document on Artificial Intelligence in Decision Making
  • COPE Guidelines on Authorship and Contributorship
  • COPE Retraction Guidelines

Authors are expected to adhere to these standards as a condition of submission to Bima Loka: Journal of Physical Education.