Promusika recognizes that large language models (LLMs) or Gen AI offer opportunities to accelerate research and its dissemination. While these opportunities can be transformative, they cannot replicate human creative and critical thinking. We distinguish various uses for AI and related technologies as: assistive (and no longer requiring disclosure), generative (requiring disclosure), and prohibitive. Promusika’s policy on the use of AI technology has been developed to assist authors, reviewers, and editors to make good judgments about the ethical use of such technology.
AI assistance (no disclosure required)
We recognize that AI- assisted writing has become more common as the technology becomes more accessible. AI tools that make suggestions to improve or enhance your own work, such as tools to improve language, grammar, or structure, are considered assistive AI tools and do not require disclosure by authors or reviewers. However, authors are responsible for ensuring their submission is accurate and meets the standards for rigorous scholarship.
Peer reviewers may use generative AI (GenAI) to help write and format the peer review reports, but they remain responsible for the content of the reports.
The primary or partial use of AI tools and/or LLMs that produce content such as references, text, images, or any other content that directly impacts the research methodology, analysis, results, and/or conclusions must be disclosed upon submission so the editorial team can evaluate the content generated. Authors should cite original sources, rather than GenAI tools as primary sources within the references. It may be appropriate to cite GenAI tools when they have been used to create images or visualizations as representative contributions rather than original.
Understanding that LLMs may have generated false content, including getting facts wrong or generating citations that don’t exist, authors must take steps to verify the accuracy of all outputs and check the original sources.
AI generated (disclosure required)
Authors should consider the following as appropriate uses for GenAI in research publishing that require disclosure within the methods or acknowledgments:
- Assistance with literature review or compilation of relevant sources
- Translation of materials as part of the research process
- Using software or code generated by AI to undertake additional research
- Assistance in research data visualization
- Generation of representative illustrations or infographics
- Code enhanced or checked for errors by AI assistance
- Assistance with compilation of references
Prohibited use of AI
While submissions will not be rejected solely because of the disclosed use of GenAI tools, if the editor becomes aware that GenAI was inappropriately used in the preparation of a submission without disclosure, the editor reserves the right to reject the submission at any time during the publishing process.
Reviewers using ChatGPT or other GenAI tools to generate review reports inappropriately will not be invited to review for the journal and their review will not be included in the final decision.
Editors must not use ChatGPT or other GenAI to generate decision letters or summaries of unpublished research. The journal and publisher reserve the right to take action if reviewers and editors breach peer-review confidentiality by using GenAI tools.
Inappropriate use of GenAI includes:
- Generation of incorrect text or content
- Generation of data or submission using a series of prompts
- Conducting interviews with GenAI tools instead of participants for qualitative research
- Analysis of experiences and themes
- Plagiarism or inappropriate attribution to prior sources
- Generated images that are presented as unique or novel research images
- Fabricated references or falsified claims
- Use of GenAI tools for editorial work or to conduct peer review
- Use of GenAI to generate peer review reports, such as uploading or copy-pasting the manuscript or parts of it to a GenAI tool
Undisclosed use of AI/LLM tools
Reviewers suspecting the inappropriate or undisclosed use of generative AI in a submission should flag their concerns with the journal editor. If editors suspect the use of Generative AI in a submitted manuscript or a submitted review, they should consider this policy in undertaking an editorial assessment of the matter or contact their Promusika representative for advice.
Promusika and the journal editor will lead a joint investigation into concerns raised about the inappropriate or undisclosed use of GenAI in a published article in accordance with guidance issued by COPE and our internal policies.