AI Policies

REFLECTION JOURNAL | RESEARCH INTEGRITY

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

Guidelines for the responsible, transparent, and ethical use of artificial intelligence and AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation, peer review, and editorial decision-making.

Human Accountability AI Disclosure Research Integrity

Policy Overview

Reflection Journal recognizes the potential benefits of artificial intelligence (AI) and generative AI technologies in scholarly communication. Tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and other AI-assisted applications may support academic workflows, but they must not replace human scientific judgment, originality, or accountability.

This policy establishes the journal's requirements for authors, reviewers, and editors. It is informed by publication ethics principles promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and relevant international publishing guidance.

Human Authorship

AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors.

Transparency

AI assistance must be appropriately disclosed.

Confidentiality

Unpublished manuscripts and review records must be protected.

Accountability

Human authors and editors retain responsibility for their decisions.

Policy Navigation

01. AI Use by Authors 02. AI Disclosure 03. Figures and Images 04. Author Accountability 05. AI in Peer Review 06. Editorial Use 07. Policy Violations 08. Policy Review 09. References

SECTION 01

Use of AI Tools by Authors

Authors may use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies to support manuscript preparation, provided that such use is responsible, transparent, and consistent with the journal's publication ethics.

Permitted supporting activities may include:

Language editing and improvement of readability.
Grammar, spelling, and writing assistance.
Organization and refinement of manuscript structure.
Assistance with reference formatting and citation checking.
Translation support with appropriate human verification.
Coding or analytical assistance when adequately verified and documented.

AI assistance must not substitute for the authors' own scientific reasoning, critical evaluation, interpretation, or original scholarly contribution.

Authorship Requirement

Artificial intelligence systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship requires intellectual responsibility, accountability, approval of the final manuscript, and the capacity to respond to questions concerning the work.

SECTION 02

Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools during manuscript preparation. This includes AI assistance related to writing, language editing, translation, coding, analysis, and other relevant activities.

The declaration should be included in the Acknowledgments or a clearly identified AI disclosure subsection. Authors should provide:

The name of the AI tool or service.
The version or model used, where available.
The purpose and extent of its use.
Confirmation that the output was reviewed and verified by the authors.

EXAMPLE OF AN AI USE DECLARATION

"During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [AI TOOL AND VERSION] to [DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE]. All AI-assisted outputs were reviewed, verified, and edited by the authors, who take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the manuscript."

When AI Tools Were Not Used

Authors who did not use AI-assisted tools during manuscript preparation are not required to provide an AI disclosure statement.

However, authors may voluntarily include the following declaration:

"The authors confirm that no generative artificial intelligence tools were used in the writing, analysis, or preparation of this manuscript."

Where AI tools constitute part of the research design, data analysis, or other methodological procedures, their use must also be described in sufficient detail in the Methods section to support reproducibility.

SECTION 03

Generative AI in Figures, Images, and Artwork

Reflection Journal does not permit the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or manipulate figures, images, graphical abstracts, or other illustrative material submitted as part of a manuscript, except where such tools are an explicitly documented component of the research methodology.

Prohibited image manipulation includes generating fabricated visual evidence, introducing or removing features, obscuring information, or changing visual content in a way that may misrepresent the original data.

Exception for Research Methodology

When AI-assisted image generation, processing, or interpretation forms an essential part of the research design, the authors must describe the procedure transparently in the Methods section. This description should include the AI tool or model, its version where available, the processing steps, and the procedures used to verify the resulting data.

Adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance may be accepted when performed through appropriate image processing procedures and when they do not remove, obscure, or misrepresent scientific information.

Authors may be asked to provide original images, underlying data, or documentation of image-processing procedures for editorial verification.

AI-generated cover artwork may be considered only with prior permission from the Editor-in-Chief and publisher, subject to appropriate attribution, legal rights, and ethical requirements.

SECTION 04

Author Responsibility and Accountability

Authors remain fully responsible for every component of their submitted and published manuscripts, regardless of whether AI tools were used during preparation.

Authors are responsible for:

Verifying the accuracy of AI-assisted content.
Checking the validity of citations and bibliographic references.
Ensuring originality and avoiding plagiarism.
Preventing fabrication or falsification of data.
Identifying and correcting inaccurate or biased information.
Protecting personal, confidential, and unpublished research data.
Ensuring compliance with copyright, licensing, and ethical requirements.

AI-generated outputs must be treated as materials requiring independent verification, not as authoritative evidence. Fabricated references, unsupported interpretations, and misleading AI-generated statements are unacceptable.

SECTION 05

Use of AI in Peer Review

Peer reviewers must evaluate submitted manuscripts independently, objectively, and in accordance with the journal's confidentiality and ethical requirements.

Reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts, figures, datasets, review correspondence, or other confidential materials to public or unauthorized AI platforms.

AI tools must not replace the reviewer's independent scholarly assessment. Reviewers may use AI for limited non-content tasks, such as improving the grammar or readability of their own review reports, provided no confidential information is disclosed.

Reviewer Disclosure

Reviewers must inform the handling editor when AI tools have been used to support the preparation of their review reports. The reviewer remains solely accountable for the content, accuracy, and recommendations of the review.

Reflection Journal reserves the right to disregard review reports that have been improperly generated using AI tools or that violate manuscript confidentiality.

SECTION 06

Editorial Use of Artificial Intelligence

Editorial staff may use approved AI-assisted or automated tools for limited administrative and technical activities, provided their use respects confidentiality, data protection, and intellectual property rights.

Such activities may include formatting checks, language assistance, and technical screening.

Editors must not upload confidential manuscript content or peer-review records to unauthorized AI services.

Human Editorial Decision-Making

Decisions concerning manuscript acceptance, revision, or rejection must be made by qualified human editors. AI-generated recommendations cannot replace independent editorial judgment or responsibility.

The Editor-in-Chief and handling editors remain responsible for maintaining fairness, academic integrity, and accountability throughout the editorial process.

SECTION 07

Ethical Violations and Consequences

Misuse of AI technologies may constitute a violation of publication ethics. Examples include:

Fabrication or falsification of research data using AI.
Generation of fabricated references or misleading scientific claims.
Misrepresentation of AI-generated material as original research findings.
Failure to disclose relevant AI assistance.
Unauthorized disclosure of confidential manuscripts to AI services.
Manipulation of research images in violation of this policy.

Suspected violations will be assessed by the Editorial Team in accordance with the journal's publication ethics procedures and relevant COPE guidance. Authors or other concerned parties will be given an appropriate opportunity to respond to allegations.

Depending on the nature and severity of a substantiated violation, the journal may:

Request clarification or supporting documentation.
Require manuscript revisions or corrections.
Reject a manuscript under consideration.
Publish a correction or expression of concern.
Retract a published article where warranted.
Notify relevant institutions when appropriate.

Editorial actions will be proportionate to the verified concern and documented through the journal's established editorial procedures.

SECTION 08

Policy Review and Updates

Reflection Journal recognizes that artificial intelligence technologies and scholarly publishing standards continue to evolve.

The Editorial Team will periodically review this policy and may introduce revisions to reflect developments in research integrity, publication ethics, confidentiality, and responsible AI use.

Any substantial changes to this policy should be communicated through the journal's official website.

SECTION 09

References and Policy Resources

This policy draws upon principles and recommendations concerning artificial intelligence in scholarly publishing.

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authorship and AI Tools.
COPE Position Statement
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Guidance and Discussions on Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review.
COPE AI and Peer Review
Elsevier. Generative AI Policies for Journals.
Generative AI Policies
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Artificial Intelligence and Fake Papers.
COPE Topic Discussion

These resources provide background guidance. Reflection Journal maintains its own editorial policy and does not claim institutional affiliation with the organizations listed.