Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

LOCUS JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC LITERATURE REVIEW

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

Transparent disclosure, responsible authorship, confidential peer review, and accountable editorial judgment.

Locus Journal of Academic Literature Review (JALR) recognizes that artificial intelligence (AI), including generative AI and AI-assisted tools, may support certain scholarly tasks. Such technologies must be used transparently and responsibly. This policy applies to authors, editors, and peer reviewers and supplements the journal's Publication Ethics, Author Guidelines, and Peer Review Process.

1. General Principles

AI tools cannot be named as authors or co-authors because they cannot assume responsibility for the originality, accuracy, integrity, or ethical implications of scholarly work. Human authors and editors remain fully accountable for their respective contributions and decisions. AI must not replace scholarly reasoning, research verification, or editorial judgment.

2. Use of AI by Authors

Authors may use AI-assisted tools for limited supporting purposes, such as language improvement, readability, or technical assistance, provided that the use is lawful, ethically appropriate, accurately disclosed where relevant, and does not compromise research quality or confidentiality. Authors must critically review, verify, and take responsibility for all AI-assisted content, including facts, quotations, citations, analyses, and interpretations.

Authors must not use AI to fabricate or falsify data, invent references or sources, misrepresent methods, generate misleading findings, conceal plagiarism, or substitute automated output for original scholarly analysis. AI-generated or AI-modified images, figures, or datasets must be identified and justified where applicable, with an explanation sufficient to evaluate their provenance and reliability. Authors must not upload confidential, personal, copyrighted, or otherwise restricted material to AI systems without appropriate authorization and safeguards.

3. Mandatory Disclosure by Authors

Authors must disclose meaningful AI use in manuscript preparation or research activities. The declaration must identify the tool or service, the purpose and scope of its use, and the human verification undertaken. Substantive AI assistance affecting methods, data processing, analysis, figures, or scholarly content should also be described in the relevant manuscript section to support methodological transparency. Routine spelling or grammar checks that do not materially affect scholarly content need not be listed individually.

Suggested AI Use Declaration

“The authors used [tool and version/provider] for [specific purpose] during preparation of this manuscript. All outputs were reviewed and verified by the authors, who take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the submitted work.”

If no reportable AI assistance was used, authors may state: “The authors declare that no generative AI tools were used in the preparation of this manuscript.” Such statements must be truthful and consistent with the actual research and writing process.

4. Use of AI by Editors

Editors must disclose AI use undertaken in their editorial role where applicable and remain responsible for the accuracy, integrity, confidentiality, and fairness of their work. AI must not replace an editor's independent evaluation of the manuscript, the assessment of reviewer reports, or the final editorial decision. Editors must protect unpublished manuscripts, reviewer identities, personal data, and confidential editorial communications when considering any AI-assisted administrative activity.

5. Prohibition of AI Use by Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers are prohibited from using AI in the peer-review process. This includes using AI to analyze or evaluate a manuscript, generate or draft review comments or recommendations, or upload a manuscript or any portion of it to an AI application.

Review reports must be prepared personally by the appointed reviewer on the basis of independent scholarly assessment. Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and disclose conflicts of interest in accordance with the Peer Review Process.

6. Verification, Corrections, and Noncompliance

The editorial team may request clarification, a revised AI declaration, supporting methodological information, or corrections when AI use is unclear or raises integrity concerns. Undisclosed or inappropriate AI use will be assessed according to the nature and seriousness of the concern, with an opportunity for explanation where appropriate. Outcomes may include a request for revision, rejection before publication, or post-publication action under the journal's Publication Ethics policy.

7. Policy Implementation

Authors should include an AI Use Declaration in their submission when applicable. Editors should verify that relevant declarations are complete, and reviewers should conduct their assessments without AI assistance. This policy applies to new submissions from its publication on the journal website; any subsequent revisions to the policy will be communicated through the journal's official information pages.

JALR is committed to human accountability in scholarly publishing. Transparency about AI assistance does not diminish authors' or editors' responsibility, and editorial decisions remain grounded in independent academic judgment.