GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE UTILIZATION POLICY

This policy governs the appropriate and inappropriate use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), AI-assisted technologies, language-support tools, and other assistive technologies in manuscript preparation, peer review, editorial handling, and publication at JPEKA: Jurnal Pendidikan Ekonomi, Manajemen dan Keuangan. AI may be used only as a supporting tool. It must not replace human scholarly contribution, critical thinking, author accountability, independent peer review, ethical responsibility, editorial independence, or editorial decision-making.

1.    General Principles

  • Transparency: AI use must be disclosed whenever this policy or the journal’s instructions require disclosure.
  • Human accountability: Authors, reviewers, editors, and the Editorial Team remain responsible for their own work, assessments, communications, and decisions.
  • Confidentiality: Submitted manuscripts, review reports, author responses, research data, supplementary files, and other unpublished information must be protected.
  • Integrity: AI must not be used to fabricate, falsify, manipulate, conceal, or misrepresent scholarly content, data, images, citations, authorship, peer review, or editorial procedures.
  • Privacy and intellectual property: AI use must comply with applicable privacy, consent, copyright, licensing, institutional, and data-protection requirements.
  • Editorial independence: AI must not determine peer-review recommendations, ethical assessments, editorial decisions, or post-publication actions.

Authors and editors must provide appropriate disclosure of AI use in accordance with their roles. Reviewers must not use AI to conduct substantive scholarly assessment, generate substantive review comments or recommendations, or share confidential manuscript material with unauthorized AI systems. Misuse may be handled under JPEKA’s applicable publication-ethics policies.

2.    Requirements for Authors

2.1 Permitted Uses

Authors may use GenAI, AI-assisted technologies, language tools, and other assistive technologies responsibly to support research and manuscript preparation. Examples include brainstorming and organizing ideas; checking grammar, spelling, punctuation, language, and readability; paraphrasing and translation; non-substantive formatting; literature or reference assistance; programming and computational support; data-related assistance; visualization support; and other appropriate assistance with research or manuscript preparation.

These tools must not replace the authors’ own scholarly contribution, analysis, interpretation, critical reasoning, argumentation, findings, discussion, or conclusions. Authors must review, verify, and edit AI-generated or AI-assisted material and remain fully accountable for the accuracy, originality, integrity, ethical compliance, and final content of the manuscript.

2.2 Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose the use of GenAI, AI-assisted technologies, and other relevant assistive tools used during the research or preparation of the manuscript. Where applicable, this includes tools used for language editing, translation, paraphrasing, programming, reference assistance, data-related tasks, visualization, and other AI-supported activities.

The disclosure section should be titled: DECLARATION OF ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGIES IN THE WRITING PROCESS

Suggested statement when AI or assistive technologies have been used:

The authors declare that generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and other AI-assisted tools were used carefully and in a limited manner during the research and preparation of this manuscript. Specifically, [AI tool 1] was used for [function 1]; [AI tool 2] for [function 2]; and [AI tool n] for [function n]. All AI-generated or AI-assisted material was reviewed and edited for accuracy, completeness, and compliance with ethical and scholarly standards. The authors accept full responsibility for the final content of the manuscript.

If no AI or assistive technology was used, authors may provide the following statement:

The authors declare that no generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), AI-assisted technologies, or other assistive technologies were used in the research or preparation of this manuscript.

Authors must identify each tool used and accurately describe its actual purpose. Where appropriate, the disclosure may be published with the article to support transparency.

2.3 AI and Authorship

GenAI systems, AI-assisted technologies, and other technological tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship requires human scholarly contribution, accountability, approval of the final manuscript, and responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the work.

2.4 AI in Research Methods, Data Analysis, and Code

When AI is used as part of the research method, data analysis or processing, programming, instrument development, intervention design, literature mapping, classification, predictive modelling, visualization, or another substantive research activity, its use must also be described in the Methods section. As relevant, authors should report the tool and version, the purpose of use, the relevant workflow, the types of input and output, the extent of human verification, and limitations affecting validity, reliability, transparency, or reproducibility. JPEKA may request prompts, outputs, logs, code, original files, or other supporting records when needed for verification.

2.5 AI in Images, Figures, and Graphic Materials

AI must not be used to fabricate, falsify, misleadingly enhance, conceal, or manipulate research evidence. If AI-generated or AI-assisted images, figures, graphic materials, or visualizations are considered scientifically and ethically appropriate, their use must be disclosed transparently and adequately verified by the authors. The journal may request original files, prompts, outputs, or supporting documentation to assess the integrity of visual materials.

2.6 Prohibited Uses by Authors

  1. Using AI as a substitute for the author’s own substantive intellectual or scholarly contribution.
  2. Fabricating, falsifying, manipulating, or misrepresenting research data, findings, analyses, results, or conclusions.
  3. Creating or using false, inaccurate, irrelevant, unverifiable, nonexistent, fabricated, or misleading citations or references.
  4. Citing sources that have not been independently verified.
  5. Concealing plagiarism, excessive similarity, duplicate publication, or inappropriate text reuse.
  6. Misleadingly manipulating citations, reference lists, images, figures, tables, or other scholarly evidence.
  7. Producing inaccurate declarations about authorship, ethics, conflicts of interest, funding, or data availability.
  8. Embedding hidden prompts, invisible text, or machine-directed instructions intended to manipulate screening, peer review, editorial handling, indexing, or evaluation.
  9. Misrepresenting the role, extent, or purpose of AI use.

3.    Requirements for Reviewers

3.1 AI Use in Peer Review

Reviewers must assess manuscripts independently, drawing on their expertise, critical evaluation, academic judgement, and ethical responsibilities. Reviewers must not use GenAI or AI-assisted technologies to analyze, evaluate, interpret, or assess a submitted manuscript; determine its validity, originality, significance, quality, or suitability; generate substantive review comments, assessments, or recommendations; formulate recommendations to accept, revise, or reject; or replace their own independent scholarly judgement. Review reports and recommendations must reflect the reviewer’s own assessment.

3.2 Confidentiality

Reviewers must not upload, enter, copy, transmit, or otherwise disclose a submitted manuscript or any part of it to public, insecure, or unauthorized AI systems. This restriction covers manuscript text, abstracts, research data, images, tables, supplementary files, author responses, review forms, unpublished findings, and other confidential peer-review material.

3.3 Reviewer Accountability

Reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, fairness, independence, confidentiality, and integrity of their reports. Any technology used in connection with peer review must not compromise confidentiality, independent scholarly judgement, review integrity, or reviewer accountability. Breaches may be treated as violations of peer-review confidentiality or publication ethics.

4.    Requirements for Editors and the Editorial Team

4.1 Permitted Non-decisional Support

Editors and the Editorial Team may use GenAI and AI-assisted technologies for supporting tasks that do not determine editorial outcomes. Examples include language and spelling checks on non-confidential editorial text; improving the clarity and structure of editorial communications; formatting and administration; organizing notes and workflows; technical or administrative screening; checking the presence of required manuscript sections and declarations; organizing metadata; background literature searches; developing or refining journal policies, guidelines, templates, forms, workflows, and checklists; and other suitable non-decisional tasks.

Any editorial work assisted by AI must be reviewed and verified, and its final version approved, by the responsible human.

4.2 Confidential Editorial Material

Submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, author responses, research data, supplementary files, confidential editorial notes, and other confidential manuscript-related material must not be uploaded to public, insecure, or unauthorized AI systems. If AI is used with confidential editorial material, it may only be processed through an adequately local, offline, private, secure, or journal-controlled system that provides appropriate safeguards for confidentiality, privacy, data protection, access control, and intellectual property.

4.3 Prohibited Uses by Editors

  1. Deciding whether a manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected.
  2. Replacing scholarly judgement or ethical assessment.
  3. Determining scientific validity or academic quality.
  4. Replacing the independent scholarly assessment of reviewers.
  5. Making final decisions on alleged misconduct or ethical concerns without human assessment.
  6. Determining post-publication editorial actions.

All editorial decisions must be made by human editors on the basis of academic expertise, peer-review reports, editorial assessment, ethical considerations, and the journal’s applicable policies.

4.4 Editorial Disclosure and Accountability

Editors and the Editorial Team should disclose substantive use of GenAI or AI-assisted technologies in editorial work where appropriate to the nature and context of the activity. When relevant, disclosure should identify the tool and its general purpose. Routine or minor support, such as spelling correction, grammar checking, formatting, or non-substantive language polishing, will generally not require a separate disclosure.

As a general disclosure, JPEKA may state that editors and the Editorial Team can use suitable AI tools, including ChatGPT, for non-decisional editorial support such as policy and template development, workflow refinement, administrative and technical assistance, language support, consistency checks, and editorial communication. This general statement does not replace specific disclosure where AI has been used substantively in a particular editorial activity and disclosure is appropriate.

All AI-assisted editorial output must be reviewed, verified, amended when necessary, and approved by a human. AI must not replace scholarly evaluation, peer-review judgement, ethical assessment, or editorial decision-making. Editors and the Editorial Team remain accountable for confidentiality, editorial integrity, scholarly and ethical judgement, communications, and all editorial decisions.

5.    Confidentiality, Privacy, and Intellectual Property

Everyone involved in publication must protect confidential and unpublished material, including manuscripts, research data, reviewer reports, author responses, supplementary materials, and editorial correspondence. Such material must not be uploaded, copied, shared, analyzed, summarized, or otherwise processed through public, insecure, or unauthorized AI systems.

AI use must comply with applicable requirements concerning copyright and licensing, privacy and data protection, participant consent, institutional rules, authors’ rights, and third-party intellectual property. When confidential material is processed through an authorized private or journal-controlled system, adequate safeguards for confidentiality, privacy, security, access control, and intellectual property remain necessary.

6.    AI-related Misconduct

The following may constitute publication-ethics violations related to AI:

  1. Failing to disclose AI use when disclosure is required.
  2. Misrepresenting the role, extent, or purpose of AI use.
  3. Using AI to fabricate, falsify, or manipulate scholarly content.
  4. Using fabricated, unverifiable, misleading, or AI-hallucinated citations or references.
  5. Using AI to conceal plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate text reuse, or unethical authorship.
  6. Misleadingly manipulating images, figures, tables, or other scholarly evidence with AI.
  7. Using hidden prompts, invisible text, or machine-directed content to manipulate scholarly or editorial systems.
  8. Using AI as a substitute for a reviewer’s independent scholarly assessment.
  9. Using AI to make or replace editorial or ethical decisions.
  10. Disclosing or processing confidential manuscripts or peer-review material through unauthorized AI systems.
  11. Any other AI use that undermines authorship responsibility, research integrity, confidentiality, peer-review integrity, editorial independence, publication ethics, or the scholarly record.

7.    Compliance and Accountability

Non-compliance may lead to appropriate editorial action under JPEKA’s applicable publication-ethics policies and, where relevant, its research-misconduct and post-publication procedures. Depending on the nature, seriousness, and timing of the concern, JPEKA may request clarification, revision, correction, or additional disclosure; request supporting documents or records of AI use; reject a manuscript before or during peer review; suspend editorial or publication processing; discontinue a reviewer’s involvement; issue a correction, Expression of Concern, retraction, removal, replacement, or other editorial notice; refer the matter to an institution, ethics committee, funder, or other relevant authority; or take another measure necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

Editorial action will be proportionate to the available evidence, the nature and severity of the issue, relevant ethical considerations, and the impact on research integrity, confidentiality, peer-review integrity, editorial independence, or the scholarly record.

8.    Relationship with Other JPEKA Policies

This policy forms part of JPEKA’s publication-ethics framework. Matters not specifically addressed here will be handled under applicable journal policies, including the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement, Author Guidelines, Peer Review Policy, Authorship and Contributorship Policy, Research Misconduct and Post-Publication Policy, research ethics requirements, and other relevant editorial policies. Suspected AI-related violations may be handled through procedures for research misconduct, complaints and appeals, corrections, Expressions of Concern, retractions, removals, replacements, or other appropriate action.

9.    Policy Review

JPEKA may periodically review and revise this policy in response to developments in GenAI and AI-assisted technologies, publication-ethics standards, COPE guidance, scholarly publishing practices, regulatory requirements, and relevant journal-accreditation requirements.

10. References

  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authorship and AI Tools.
  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Focus on Artificial Intelligence.
  • Generative AI Policies for Journals. Elsevier Policies and Standards.
  • Publishing Ethics. Elsevier Policies and Standards.
  • STM Association. Generative AI in Scholarly Communications: Ethical and Practical Guidelines for the Use of Generative AI in the Publication Process.