Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

The Journal of Advanced Vocational Information and Communication Technology (JAVICT) recognizes the rapid development of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies, as well as their increasing use in research and scholarly communication.

This policy provides guidance to authors, reviewers, and editors to support transparency, accountability, research integrity, confidentiality, and responsible use of AI tools. JAVICT may review and update this policy as technologies, scholarly practices, and relevant ethical guidance evolve.

A
Authors Transparency and accountability
R
Reviewers Confidentiality and human judgment
E
Editors Independent editorial responsibility
A

For Authors

Responsible use, disclosure, and accountability

1. Use of Generative AI in Manuscript Preparation

JAVICT recognizes that generative AI and AI-assisted tools (“AI Tools”) may assist authors with activities such as language improvement, content organization, or other limited forms of manuscript support.

Core Principle: AI tools must not replace human critical thinking, scientific analysis, interpretation, or scholarly judgment. Authors remain fully responsible and accountable for all submitted content.

Authors are responsible for:

  • carefully reviewing and verifying the accuracy, validity, and reliability of AI-assisted content;
  • checking all references and citations because AI tools may generate inaccurate, incomplete, or fabricated references;
  • ensuring that the manuscript reflects the authors’ original intellectual contribution;
  • protecting personal, confidential, proprietary, and unpublished information;
  • ensuring compliance with copyright, intellectual property, research ethics, and applicable legal requirements.

2. Responsible Use of AI Tools

Authors must:

  • review the terms of use, privacy policy, and relevant data-handling practices of any AI tool used;
  • avoid uploading unpublished manuscripts, confidential peer-review materials, or restricted information to external AI systems;
  • avoid uploading sensitive, personal, proprietary, or otherwise protected data without appropriate authorization and safeguards;
  • understand, where reasonably possible, whether submitted materials may be retained, reused, or processed by the AI service;
  • check AI-assisted outputs for bias, factual errors, unsupported claims, inappropriate interpretation, and misleading content.

3. Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools in manuscript preparation. The disclosure should identify the tool and explain its purpose sufficiently to support transparency.

Example Disclosure Statement

“The authors used [Tool Name, Version] to assist with [language editing / content organization / data summarization]. All outputs were reviewed, verified, and revised as necessary by the authors, who remain fully responsible for the final content.”

  • Routine spelling or basic grammar correction that does not generate substantive intellectual content does not require disclosure.
  • When AI is part of the research design, experimental system, analytical pipeline, or methodology, its use must be described in the relevant Methods section rather than treated solely as manuscript-preparation assistance.

4. Authorship

AI tools:

Cannot be listed as an author
Cannot be listed as a co-author
Do not meet authorship criteria

Authorship requires intellectual responsibility, accountability for the accuracy and integrity of the work, approval of the final manuscript, responsibility for corrections where necessary, and the ability to respond to questions regarding the published work. These responsibilities can only be fulfilled by human authors.

5. AI in Figures, Images, and Artwork

Unless generative AI is itself part of the research methodology and is transparently reported, JAVICT does not permit the use of generative AI to create or manipulate scientific images, figures, or visual evidence in submitted manuscripts.

Prohibited uses include:

  • adding, removing, or altering scientifically meaningful features;
  • selectively enhancing specific elements in a manner that changes interpretation;
  • generating synthetic visual representations that are presented as observed or original research data;
  • producing graphical or visual research content through generative AI without appropriate disclosure and methodological justification.

Permitted Adjustments: Limited adjustments such as brightness, contrast, or color balance may be acceptable provided that they do not obscure, remove, introduce, or misrepresent information and that the integrity of the original data is preserved.

Exception: AI as Part of the Research Methodology

When AI-based image generation, enhancement, analysis, or transformation is an explicit component of the research methodology, its use must be:

  • clearly described in the Methods section;
  • sufficiently documented to support evaluation and, where applicable, reproducibility;
  • accompanied by relevant tool or model name and version, where available;
  • supported by appropriate technical details, parameters, procedures, or prompts where necessary for scholarly evaluation.

The editorial office may request original files, raw images, supporting data, or other relevant materials when clarification or verification is necessary.

R

For Reviewers

Confidentiality and independent scholarly judgment

Use of AI in Peer Review

Peer-review materials are confidential. Reviewers must not disclose submitted manuscripts or confidential review materials to unauthorized external AI systems.

Reviewers must not:

  • upload submitted manuscripts, figures, tables, data, or substantial manuscript excerpts into unauthorized AI tools;
  • upload confidential review reports or editorial communications into external AI tools where confidentiality cannot be assured;
  • delegate scientific evaluation or critical assessment of a manuscript to generative AI;
  • rely on AI-generated conclusions as a substitute for independent expert judgment.

Peer review requires human critical judgment, subject expertise, accountability, and independent evaluation. Reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, fairness, relevance, and integrity of their review reports.

E

For Editors

Confidentiality and editorial accountability

Use of AI in Editorial Processes

Editors must treat submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, author correspondence, and related editorial communications as confidential materials.

Editors must not:

  • upload submitted manuscripts or confidential manuscript content into unauthorized AI systems;
  • upload confidential reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, or decision materials into external AI tools where confidentiality cannot be assured;
  • delegate scientific evaluation or editorial judgment to generative AI;
  • use AI-generated recommendations as a substitute for responsible human editorial decision-making.

Editorial decisions require human expertise, accountability, ethical responsibility, and independent judgment. The Editor-in-Chief, responsible editors, and Editorial Board remain accountable for the integrity of the editorial process.

C

Compliance and Monitoring

Handling potential non-compliance

JAVICT may assess suspected non-compliance with this policy in accordance with the nature, severity, available evidence, stage of publication, and relevant journal policies.

Clarification Authors may be asked to explain or disclose AI use.
Correction Revision or correction may be requested where appropriate.
Rejection Serious pre-publication violations may result in rejection.
Post-Publication Action Corrections, notices, or retraction may be considered where justified.

JAVICT is committed to responsible scholarly publishing, publication ethics, transparency, and research integrity. The journal may update this policy as AI technologies and scholarly practices continue to evolve.

Human Accountability Remains Essential

AI tools may support selected research and scholarly communication activities, but responsibility for accuracy, originality, confidentiality, interpretation, ethical compliance, and final scholarly judgment remains with human authors, reviewers, and editors.