Policy on the Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

JRPIPM is committed to promoting transparency, ethical authorship practices, and academic integrity. This policy provides guidance for authors, readers, reviewers, and editors regarding the appropriate use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies during the manuscript preparation process. The policy will be reviewed periodically and revised as necessary to reflect developments in this rapidly evolving field.

This policy specifically addresses the use of AI in the writing process and does not apply to the use of AI-based tools employed for data analysis or interpretation within the research methodology. Authors may use generative AI and AI-assisted tools strictly for the purpose of enhancing the readability and linguistic clarity of the manuscript. However, such technologies must not be used to perform core scholarly tasks, including conceptualizing research, developing pedagogical or scientific arguments, drawing conclusions, or formulating recommendations. The use of AI tools must be conducted under strict human oversight. Authors are required to critically review and edit all AI-generated content to ensure its accuracy, completeness, and impartiality, as such tools may produce output that appears authoritative but may, in fact, be erroneous, misleading, or biased.

Authors remain fully responsible and accountable for the entirety of the content submitted and ultimately published. Any use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies must be transparently disclosed in the manuscript, and a corresponding statement will be included in the published article. This practice fosters trust among all stakeholders—authors, readers, reviewers, editors, and contributors—while also ensuring compliance with the terms and conditions of the relevant technologies. This policy applies exclusively to the creation of original content, such as new manuscripts or new sections added to revised works. The application of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies to previously published material is strictly prohibited.

Allowed Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

Authors are permitted to utilize generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in specific aspects of manuscript preparation, provided their use aligns with ethical standards and maintains the integrity of scholarly work. Acceptable applications include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Authors may employ generative AI tools to identify and correct grammatical errors, spelling mistakes, and to enhance the overall fluency and readability of the manuscript.
2. AI-assisted technologies may be used to support citation management, including formatting references according to required styles and generating bibliographic lists accurately.
3. Authors are encouraged to use AI-powered plagiarism detection tools to verify the originality of their work and ensure compliance with academic integrity standards.
4. AI-based tools may assist in the processing and analysis of complex datasets, as well as in the visualization and presentation of research findings in a clear, accurate, and concise manner.

All uses of such technologies must be conducted under human oversight. Authors are ultimately responsible for verifying the accuracy, reliability, and appropriateness of AI-assisted outputs integrated into their manuscript.

Not Allowed Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

While generative AI and AI-assisted technologies can support various tasks in manuscript preparation, their use is subject to important limitations to uphold the integrity of academic authorship and scholarly communication. The following practices are strictly prohibited:

1. Authors must not rely on AI tools to generate the main sections of the manuscript, including the introduction, methodology, results, and conclusion. These sections must reflect the original intellectual contributions and scholarly reasoning of the authors.
2. The use of AI technologies to fabricate or manipulate data, generate fraudulent results, or engage in any unethical practices in the research or writing process is strictly forbidden.
3. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies must not be listed as authors or co-authors of the manuscript. Additionally, AI tools should not be cited as authors in the reference list or within the text.
4. JRPIPM does not permit the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create, modify, or manipulate images or visual elements in submitted manuscripts.

These restrictions are intended to preserve academic integrity, ensure accountability, and maintain the trust of the scholarly community. Violations of this policy may result in manuscript rejection or further action in accordance with the journal’s ethical guidelines.

Ethical Considerations

Authors are required to uphold ethical guidelines and adhere to the highest standards of academic integrity when utilizing generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation. Any use of AI-generated content that infringes upon copyright, constitutes plagiarism, or involves unethical practices—such as misappropriation of intellectual property or misrepresentation of sources—will be deemed a violation of the journal’s publication ethics. Such breaches may lead to the rejection of the manuscript, retraction of the published article, or further disciplinary action in accordance with the journal’s ethical and legal policies.

 

For Peer Reviewers
Prohibited Use of AI in Peer-Review Assessment
Peer Reviewers must conduct scholarly assessment independently based on their own expertise, critical evaluation, academic judgment, and ethical responsibility.
Reviewers must not use Gen AI or AI-assisted technologies to:
1. analyze, evaluate, interpret, or assess the scholarly content of a submitted manuscript;
2. determine its validity, originality, significance, quality, or suitability;
3. generate or draft substantive peer-review comments, assessments, or recommendations;
4. formulate recommendations concerning acceptance, revision, or rejection; or
5. replace the Reviewer’s own independent scholarly judgment.
Peer-review comments and recommendations must reflect the Reviewer’s own independent scholarly assessment.
Confidentiality
Reviewers must not upload, enter, copy, transmit, or otherwise provide a submitted manuscript or any part thereof to public, unsecured, or unauthorized AI systems.
This includes manuscript text, abstracts, research data, figures, tables, supplementary files, Author responses, review forms, unpublished findings, and other confidential peer-review materials.
Reviewer Responsibility
Reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, fairness, independence, confidentiality, and integrity of their peer-review reports.
Any use of technology in connection with peer review must not compromise confidentiality, independent scholarly judgment, peer-review integrity, or the Reviewer’s responsibility for the submitted review.
Violation of these requirements may be treated as a breach of peer-review confidentiality or publication ethics.
For Editors and Editorial Staff
Permitted Supportive Use
Editors and editorial staff may use Gen AI and AI-assisted technologies for supportive and non-decisional editorial purposes.
Such uses may include:
1. grammar, spelling, and language polishing of non-confidential editorial text;
2. improving the clarity and structure of editorial communications;
3. formatting and administrative assistance;
4. organization of editorial notes and workflows;
5. technical or administrative manuscript screening;
6. checking the presence of required manuscript sections or declarations;
7. metadata organization;
8. background literature support;
9. development of editorial templates, workflows, and checklists;
10. development, discussion, review, consistency checking, and refinement of journal policies, guidelines, manuscript templates, forms, and other editorial documents; and
11. other appropriate non-decisional editorial support.
AI-assisted editorial work remains subject to human review, verification, and final approval by the responsible Editor or journal management.
Use with Confidential Editorial Materials
Submitted manuscripts, Reviewer reports, Author responses, research data, supplementary files, confidential editorial notes, and other confidential manuscript-related materials must not be uploaded to public, unsecured, or unauthorized AI systems.
Where AI is used with confidential editorial materials, such use may occur only through an appropriately local, offline, private, secure, or journal-controlled system with adequate safeguards for confidentiality, privacy, data protection, access control, and intellectual property.
Prohibited Use by Editors
Editors and editorial staff must not use AI to:
1. determine whether a manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected;
2. replace scholarly or ethical judgment;
3. determine scientific validity or scholarly merit;
4. replace the independent scholarly assessment of Peer Reviewers;
5. make final judgments concerning misconduct or ethical violations without human assessment; or
determine post-publication editorial actions.
All editorial decisions must be made by human Editors based on academic expertise, peer-review results, editorial assessment, ethical considerations, and applicable JRPIPM policies.
Transparency, Disclosure, and Accountability by Editors
Editors and editorial staff must disclose substantive use of Gen AI or AI-assisted technologies in editorial work, in accordance with the nature and context of the activity.
Where relevant, such disclosure should identify the AI tool used and its general function or purpose. Routine or minor supportive uses, such as grammar checking, spelling correction, formatting assistance, or non-substantive language refinement, do not normally require separate disclosure.
As a general disclosure, JRPIPM declares that its Editors and editorial staff may use Gen AI and AI-assisted technologies, including ChatGPT and other appropriate AI-assisted tools, to support non-decisional editorial activities, including policy development and refinement, preparation of guidelines and templates, editorial workflow development, administrative and technical support, language assistance, consistency checking, and editorial communications.
This general disclosure does not replace specific disclosure where AI is used substantively in a particular editorial activity and such disclosure is appropriate.
All AI-assisted editorial outputs remain subject to human review, verification, modification where necessary, and final approval. Gen AI and AI-assisted technologies must not replace scholarly assessment, peer-review judgment, ethical judgment, or editorial decision-making.
Editors and editorial staff remain fully responsible for confidentiality, editorial integrity, scholarly and ethical judgment, editorial communications, and all editorial decisions.