Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

1. Policy Statement

Administratio: Jurnal Ilmiah Administrasi Publik dan Pembangunan recognises that artificial intelligence (AI), including generative AI tools and large language models (LLMs), can support various aspects of academic research, writing, and scholarly communication. The journal acknowledges the potential benefits of these technologies while emphasising the importance of academic integrity, research ethics, transparency, accountability, and the reliability of scholarly publications.

This policy establishes the principles governing the use of AI tools by authors, editors, and peer reviewers involved in the journal's publication process. Its primary objective is to ensure that AI is used responsibly and does not compromise the originality, validity, confidentiality, or scholarly integrity of published research.

2. Use of AI by Authors

Authors may use AI tools to support specific aspects of manuscript preparation, including language editing, grammar correction, translation, organisation of ideas, and improvement of readability. AI tools may also be used for other research-related purposes where their use is methodologically appropriate, ethically permissible, and transparently reported.

However, AI tools must not replace the authors' intellectual contribution, critical judgement, or responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of their research. Authors remain fully responsible for all content submitted to the journal, including material generated, revised, or otherwise assisted by AI tools.

Authors must ensure that:

1. All factual claims, references, quotations, data, and interpretations are independently verified.

2. AI-generated references, citations, or bibliographic information are not presented as authentic without verification against reliable sources.

3. AI tools are not used to fabricate or falsify research data, manipulate findings, misrepresent evidence, or produce misleading scholarly arguments.

4. The use of AI does not infringe copyright, violate research participants' rights, breach confidentiality, or compromise personal data.

5. The manuscript reflects genuine scholarly engagement and the authors' own critical analysis and intellectual contribution.

AI systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors because they cannot assume responsibility for the work, provide authorial consent, or be held accountable for the integrity of the publication.

3. Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI tools when such tools have contributed substantively to the development of the manuscript, including the generation or substantial revision of scholarly text, analytical content, or other material forming part of the research output.

The disclosure should identify the AI tool used, its purpose, and the relevant stage of the research or writing process. Authors should provide sufficient information to enable readers and editors to understand the role of AI in producing the manuscript.

Routine spelling, grammar, and punctuation checks, as well as basic reference-management functions, generally do not require disclosure unless they involve substantive generative AI assistance or the journal's submission instructions specify otherwise.

A disclosure statement may be included in a dedicated section entitled “Declaration of Generative AI Use” or in the acknowledgements section, as appropriate.

Example disclosure statement:

“During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of AI tool] for [specific purpose]. The authors subsequently reviewed, verified, and revised the relevant content and take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the published work.”

If no generative AI tools were used in preparing the manuscript, authors may state:

“The authors declare that no generative AI tools were used in the preparation of this manuscript.”

4. Use of AI by Editors

Editors may use AI tools for limited administrative or editorial support, provided that such use complies with the journal's confidentiality requirements, applicable data protection obligations, and editorial policies.

AI tools must not replace editorial judgement in decisions concerning a manuscript's suitability, originality, methodological rigour, ethical compliance, or publication potential.

Editors must not upload unpublished manuscripts, confidential reviewer reports, personal data, or other sensitive editorial materials to external AI systems unless the use is explicitly authorised, appropriately secured, and consistent with the journal's confidentiality obligations.

Editors remain responsible for all editorial decisions and must ensure that any AI-assisted output is critically evaluated before use.

5. Use of AI by Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers must assess manuscripts on the basis of their own expertise, independent judgement, and professional responsibility.

Reviewers must not upload or disclose unpublished manuscripts, confidential manuscript content, or editorial correspondence to generative AI tools or other external systems that have not been authorised for such purposes by the journal.

AI tools must not replace the reviewer's independent evaluation of the manuscript's theoretical contribution, research design, methodology, evidence, findings, and scholarly significance.

Reviewers who use AI for permitted, limited support must ensure that the resulting material does not compromise confidentiality, introduce inaccurate assessments, or undermine the independence of peer review. Reviewers remain fully accountable for the content and recommendations of their reports.

6. Prohibited Uses of AI

The following uses of AI are prohibited:

1. Fabricating, falsifying, or manipulating research data, evidence, references, or research findings.

2. Presenting AI-generated content as verified evidence or as original scholarly analysis without appropriate human evaluation and, where required, disclosure.

3. Using AI to generate fictitious citations, misrepresent sources, or reproduce unsupported claims as established facts.

4. Using AI to impersonate authors, reviewers, research participants, or other individuals.

5. Disclosing confidential manuscripts, peer-review reports, or protected research information through unauthorised AI systems.

6. Using AI in ways that violate copyright, research ethics, data protection requirements, or the rights of research participants.

7. Using AI-generated images, figures, or other visual materials to misrepresent research evidence or manipulate scientific results.

7. Editorial Assessment and Compliance

The editorial team may request clarification or additional disclosure regarding the use of AI when concerns arise about the originality, accuracy, authorship, or integrity of a submitted manuscript.

Where a potential violation of this policy is identified, the journal will assess the matter fairly and proportionately, taking into account the nature and extent of the AI use, the applicable disclosure requirements, and the relevant publication ethics standards.

Depending on the circumstances, the journal may request a correction or clarification, require revisions, reject a submission, or take further action consistent with its publication ethics procedures.

AI-detection tools, where used, must not be treated as conclusive evidence of misconduct. Any concerns must be evaluated through appropriate editorial assessment and, where necessary, further clarification from the authors.

8. Policy Review

This policy will be reviewed periodically to reflect developments in AI technology, scholarly publishing standards, research ethics, and applicable legal requirements. The journal reserves the right to revise this policy when necessary and will communicate relevant changes through its official publication channels.

By submitting a manuscript to Administratio: Jurnal Ilmiah Administrasi Publik dan Pembangunan, authors acknowledge their responsibility to comply with this policy and with the journal's broader standards of academic integrity and publication ethics.