Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy for MJPJETL
MJPJETL (Journal of Education and Teaching Learning) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity, transparency, and publication ethics. In response to the rapid development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies and Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and similar tools, we have established the following guidelines based on the standards set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). These guidelines apply to all parties involved in the publication process.
1. Policy for Authors
-
Prohibition of AI Authorship: AI programs, LLMs, or other machine learning tools cannot be listed as an author or co-author. AI does not possess legal standing and cannot be held accountable for the content, integrity, and originality of a manuscript.
-
Transparency and Declaration: If authors utilize AI to assist in drafting the manuscript (e.g., paraphrasing, language translation, or grammar editing), data collection, or data analysis, they must declare this use transparently. This declaration should be included in the Acknowledgments section or a dedicated AI Declaration subsection at the end of the manuscript, prior to the References. Authors must specify the name of the AI tool used and the purpose of its application.
-
Full Accountability: Human authors retain 100% responsibility for the entire content of the manuscript. Authors must manually verify all AI-generated data, citations, and arguments to prevent AI hallucination (false or fabricated information), bias, and plagiarism.
-
Images and Graphics: The use of generative AI to create or manipulate images, graphics, or tables is strictly limited and must be clearly labeled, unless its use is explicitly part of the research methodology being investigated.
2. Policy for Reviewers
-
Manuscript Confidentiality: Reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading authors' manuscripts (in whole or in part) into public AI tools (such as ChatGPT or Gemini) to request summaries, evaluations, or draft reviews. Feeding unpublished manuscripts into AI platforms constitutes a severe breach of confidentiality and the authors' copyright.
-
Independent Evaluation: Critical assessment, methodological evaluation, and decision recommendations (Accept/Reject/Revision) must be entirely the result of human intellectual thought. AI tools must not replace the human peer-review process.
-
Language Assistance: Reviewers are permitted to use AI tools solely for the purpose of refining the grammar or sentence structure of their own self-written review reports; however, the core meaning and substance of the review must not be altered by the AI.
3. Policy for the Editorial Board (Editors)
-
Editorial Decisions: The final decision-making process (accepting or rejecting a manuscript) is the absolute authority and sole responsibility of human Editors. AI must not be used to make final editorial decisions.
-
Editorial Tools: Editors may use journal-approved AI-based technologies (such as iThenticate or Turnitin) to detect plagiarism, check text similarity, or identify potential AI-generated text. Editors may also utilize AI search tools to help identify suitable reviewer candidates based on their expertise.
-
Ethical Oversight: The editorial board is responsible for monitoring authors' and reviewers' compliance with this AI policy and reserves the right to Desk Reject manuscripts suspected of manipulative or undeclared AI use.
4. Policy for Readers
-
Right to Transparency: Readers have the right to know the limitations and the role of AI in the articles they read. MJPJETL ensures that every published article utilizing AI includes a clear and accessible declaration.
-
Limitation of Guarantee: Although MJPJETL implements a rigorous double-blind peer-review process, the responsibility for the data accuracy and scientific validity of AI-assisted content rests entirely with the authors of the article.
