Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

Thoughts Review (TR) recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies are increasingly used in scholarly research and publishing. The journal is committed to the responsible, transparent, and ethical use of these tools while preserving human accountability, academic integrity, and the trust of the scholarly record.

This policy applies to all participants in the publication process, including authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and journal staff. It is informed by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) , the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) , the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) , and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, WAME).

1. Purpose and Scope

This policy establishes the principles and requirements for the use of AI tools in the preparation, evaluation, and publication of manuscripts submitted to Thoughts Review. It aims to:

               i.      Clarify what constitutes acceptable and unacceptable use of AI.

             ii.      Establish mandatory disclosure requirements.

           iii.      Define the responsibilities of authors, reviewers, and editors.

           iv.      Ensure compliance with international indexing and ethical standards.

This policy covers all forms of AI, including but not limited to large language models (LLMs), chatbots (e.g., ChatGPT), image-generation tools, code-generation tools, translation tools, and automated writing assistants.

2. Core Principles

Thoughts Review adopts the following core principles regarding AI in scholarly publishing:

a. Human Accountability: Authors remain fully responsible for the content, accuracy, originality, and integrity of their work, regardless of any AI assistance used.

b.Transparency: Any substantive use of AI tools must be openly and accurately disclosed.

c. Authorship Integrity: AI tools cannot be listed, credited, or cited as authors or co-authors.

d.Confidentiality: Confidential manuscripts and research data must not be uploaded to external AI systems without authorization.

e. Human Oversight: AI should support, not replace, human judgment, critical thinking, and scholarly expertise.

These principles align with the positions of COPE, ICMJE, and DOAJ, all of which affirm that AI tools do not meet the criteria for authorship because they cannot take responsibility for the work, cannot assert conflicts of interest, and cannot manage copyright or licensing agreements.

3. Use of AI by Authors

3.1 Permitted Uses

Authors may use AI tools to support their work in ways that do not compromise originality, integrity, or accountability. Permitted uses include, but are not limited to:

a)      Improving language, grammar, spelling, and readability.

b)      Organizing content, summarizing literature, or identifying research gaps.

c)      Assisting with data analysis or visualization (where the methodology is transparent and reproducible).

d)      Generating explanatory images or diagrams (subject to disclosure and editorial approval).

e)      Translation of content (with verification by the author).

AI tools can support and accelerate scholarly work, but human expertise, critical thinking, and evaluation remain central.

3.2 Mandatory Disclosure

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI tools in the preparation of their manuscript when such use goes beyond straightforward language correction, editing, or formatting. Basic spelling, grammar, and punctuation checks do not require disclosure; however, where an AI tool makes substantive changes to sentence structure, organization, or content, that use must be declared.

 

The disclosure must be provided in a separate AI Declaration Statement at the time of submission. This statement should:

A.    Identify the name of the AI tool used.

B.     Explain the purpose of its use (e.g., language editing, literature summarization, code generation, image creation).

C.     Confirm that the authors have reviewed and edited the AI-assisted content and take full responsibility for the final published article.

Where AI tools have been used to create or edit an image, this must also be disclosed in the image caption itself, in addition to the general AI declaration.

3.3 Prohibited Uses

Authors must not use AI tools to:

               I.      Fabricate or falsify data, references, or findings.

            II.      Conceal plagiarism or misrepresent the originality of the work.

         III.      Generate content that is presented as original without proper attribution or disclosure.

         IV.      Circumvent peer review or manipulate the editorial process.

            V.      Create or alter images that represent primary research data, unless explicitly permitted by the journal and fully disclosed.

         VI.      Infringe copyright or use protected material without permission.

3.4 Author Responsibility

Authors remain fully and exclusively responsible for the content of their manuscripts, including any parts produced or assisted by AI tools. This includes responsibility for:

1)      The accuracy, completeness, and originality of all content.

2)      The verification of all references, data, and images.

3)      Compliance with all applicable ethical and legal requirements.

4)      Ensuring that AI-generated material does not contain bias, errors, or fabricated information.

Authors should also check the terms and conditions of any AI tool they use, particularly when working with unpublished manuscripts, research data, or personal information, to ensure that confidentiality and data privacy are protected.

4. Use of AI by Reviewers

4.1 Permitted Uses

Reviewers may use AI tools to support their evaluation in limited ways, such as:

               i.      Checking language and readability.

             ii.      Identifying potential inconsistencies or gaps in the manuscript.

           iii.      Assisting with literature verification (with independent verification).

4.2 Prohibited Use

Reviewers must not:

A.    Upload confidential manuscripts or any part thereof to external AI systems or public platforms. This is a breach of confidentiality and data protection obligations.

B.     Use AI to generate review reports or assessments without substantial human input and oversight. The evaluation must reflect the reviewer's own scholarly judgment.

C.     Use AI to identify authors or circumvent the double-anonymous review process.

D.    Rely on AI-generated content without independent verification of its accuracy.

4.3 Reviewer Responsibility

Reviewers are responsible for the content of their reports. Any use of AI in the review process must be consistent with the journal's confidentiality requirements and must not compromise the integrity or fairness of the peer review system.

5. Use of AI by Editors and Editorial Staff

5.1 Permitted Uses

Editors and editorial staff may use AI tools to support administrative and editorial tasks, such as:

                                                              i.      Screening manuscripts for scope and completeness.

                                                            ii.      Assisting with plagiarism detection (using validated tools).

                                                          iii.      Managing workflow and correspondence.

5.2 Prohibited Uses

Editors and editorial staff must not:

                                                              i.      Upload confidential manuscripts to external AI systems.

                                                            ii.      Use AI to make editorial decisions without human oversight and accountability.

                                                          iii.      Use AI to create or alter peer review reports in ways that misrepresent the reviewer's assessment.

                                                          iv.      Rely on AI-generated assessments as a substitute for independent scholarly judgment.

5.3 Human Oversight

 All editorial decisions must be made by human editors. AI tools may inform, but must not replace, editorial judgment. The journal will maintain human oversight of any automated tools used in the editorial process and will be transparent about their use.

6. AI and Authorship

In accordance with COPE, ICMJE, DOAJ, and major indexing standards:

1.      AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of a manuscript.

2.      AI tools cannot be cited as a source or credited with intellectual contributions.

3.      AI systems cannot assume responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, or originality of the work, nor can they assert the presence or absence of conflicts of interest or manage copyright and licensing agreements.

Any contribution of AI tools should be acknowledged in the AI Declaration Statement and, where appropriate, in the Acknowledgements section, but this does not constitute authorship.

7. AI and Image Generation

The use of AI to generate or alter images requires particular caution.

a. Authors must not use AI to create or alter images that represent primary research data (e.g., microscopy, gel electrophoresis, clinical images) unless explicitly permitted by the journal and fully disclosed.

b.AI-generated images used for illustrative or explanatory purposes must be clearly labeled as AI-generated in the caption.

c. The use of AI in image creation or editing must be disclosed in the AI Declaration Statement and in the image caption.

Editors may request additional documentation or reject images that appear to have been improperly generated or altered.

8. AI and Plagiarism

The use of AI tools does not exempt authors from the requirements of the journal's Plagiarism and Similarity Policy.

Authors must not use AI to:

               i.      Paraphrase or generate content from other sources without proper attribution.

             ii.      Conceal plagiarism or manipulate similarity scores.

           iii.      Fabricate references or content.

Any manuscript suspected of using AI to conceal plagiarism or misrepresent originality will be investigated in accordance with the journal's plagiarism and misconduct procedures.

9. AI and Confidentiality

Confidentiality is a cornerstone of scholarly publishing. All participants must ensure that:

1.      Unpublished manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial correspondence are not uploaded to external AI systems or public platforms without authorization.

2.      Any AI tool used complies with applicable data protection and privacy laws.

3.      Confidential information obtained through the publication process is not used for personal, professional, or research advantage.

This obligation applies to authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff, and continues after the review or editorial process has concluded.

10. Handling Violations of This Policy

Failure to comply with this AI Policy may constitute a breach of publication ethics and may result in editorial action.

Possible actions include:

               i.      Request for clarification or correction of the AI Declaration Statement.

             ii.      Rejection of the manuscript at any stage of the editorial process.

           iii.      Retraction of a published article where undisclosed or prohibited AI use materially affects the integrity of the work, in accordance with the journal's Corrections, Retractions and Expressions of Concern Policy.

           iv.      Notification of the authors' institutions or relevant authorities in cases of serious misconduct.

             v.      Publication of an Expression of Concern while an investigation is ongoing.

All investigations will be conducted fairly, confidentially, and in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.

11. Transparency and Journal Use of AI

Thoughts Review is committed to transparency regarding its own use of AI and automated tools.

1.      The journal will be transparent about any automated tools used in its editorial or publishing processes.

2.      Any such tools will be validated and subject to human oversight.

3.      The journal will not use AI to make editorial decisions without human accountability.

12. International Standards and Best Practices

This policy is developed in accordance with internationally recognized publication ethics principles and informed by the recommendations of:

               i.      Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

             ii.      International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)

           iii.      Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)

           iv.      Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, WAME)

             v.      Major indexing databases, including Scopus and Web of Science

Thoughts Review follows the ethical principles and best practices recommended by these organizations to ensure responsible publishing and the protection of the scholarly record. Scopus, in particular, encourages journals to have a dedicated GenAI policy and to disclose the use of GenAI in content creation and the publishing process. DOAJ recommends that journals publish an AI policy and that authors disclose generative AI use beyond basic editing.

13. Policy Review

Thoughts Review periodically reviews and updates this policy to ensure continued alignment with evolving standards of research integrity, AI governance, and ethical publishing. The editorial team is responsible for implementing this policy consistently and for reviewing it when significant ethical or technological developments arise.

Contact

Questions or concerns regarding this Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy should be directed to the Thoughts Review editorial office using the official contact details published on the journal website.