Generative AI Policies

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) Policy

1. Introduction

Technomedia Journal (TMJ) recognizes that Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) and AI-assisted technologies are increasingly used in scholarly research, manuscript preparation, peer review, and editorial workflows. When used responsibly, these technologies may support authors and editorial participants in improving efficiency, language quality, organization, and accessibility.

However, the use of AI technologies also raises important concerns regarding authorship, research integrity, confidentiality, intellectual property, data protection, and accountability.

To maintain research integrity, transparency, and responsible scholarly communication, TMJ establishes this Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) Policy. This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff involved in the submission, peer-review, editorial, and publication processes.

2. General Principles

TMJ supports the responsible use of AI-assisted technologies based on the following principles:

  • Human intellectual contribution, critical thinking, and scholarly judgment must remain central to all published research.
  • AI tools may only serve as supporting technologies and must not replace human expertise, scientific reasoning, or editorial judgment.
  • Authors, reviewers, and editors remain responsible and accountable for their respective work and decisions.
  • The use of AI technologies must be transparent where disclosure is required.
  • Confidential, unpublished, or sensitive information must be protected from unauthorized disclosure to AI systems.
  • AI-generated content must be carefully reviewed and verified by humans.

3. Policy for Authors

3.1 AI Cannot Be an Author

Generative AI systems, AI tools, chatbots, or other AI technologies cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of a manuscript.

Only human contributors who meet the journal's authorship requirements may be listed as authors.

Human authors remain fully responsible for:

  • the accuracy and integrity of the manuscript;
  • approval of the final version;
  • responses to editorial and reviewer comments;
  • compliance with publication ethics;
  • originality and appropriate attribution; and
  • copyright and licensing requirements.

AI systems cannot assume these responsibilities and therefore cannot qualify for authorship.

This provision is particularly important because authorship entails accountability and responsibilities that can only be fulfilled by human contributors. This is also consistent with current Elsevier guidance.

3.2 Acceptable Use of AI

Authors may use AI-assisted technologies during manuscript preparation for appropriate purposes, including:

  • improving grammar, spelling, and language;
  • improving readability and academic writing style;
  • organizing manuscript structure;
  • developing preliminary outlines or summaries;
  • generating ideas or supporting literature exploration;
  • supporting coding documentation or formatting;
  • assisting with other non-substantive editorial tasks.

However, AI tools must not replace the authors' own scientific reasoning, methodological decisions, interpretation of findings, or scholarly conclusions.

All AI-generated output must be critically evaluated, fact-checked, and revised by the authors before inclusion in the manuscript.

Authors remain responsible for identifying inaccurate, incomplete, biased, or fabricated AI-generated information, including potentially incorrect references.

3.3 AI Use in Research

When AI technologies are used as part of the research methodology, rather than merely for manuscript preparation, authors must describe the use of AI in the appropriate Methods section.

The description should provide sufficient information to explain:

  • the AI tool or system used;
  • its purpose;
  • how it was incorporated into the research process; and
  • the role of the researchers in controlling and validating the AI-assisted process.

This requirement is particularly relevant when AI is used for data analysis, coding, research design, modeling, or other substantive research activities.

3.4 Mandatory AI Disclosure

When AI or AI-assisted technologies have been used beyond basic spelling, grammar, or punctuation checking, authors must disclose such use in a separate statement before the References section.

The declaration should identify:

  • the name of the AI system or tool;
  • the purpose for which it was used;
  • the extent of its use; and
  • confirmation that the AI-assisted output was reviewed, verified, and approved by the authors.

Example

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [NAME OF AI TOOL] to [PURPOSE]. After using this tool, the authors reviewed and edited the content as necessary and take full responsibility for the content of the published article.

Basic grammar, spelling, and punctuation checks do not require a separate disclosure.

4. AI-Generated Figures, Images, and Multimedia

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in creating or substantially modifying figures, illustrations, graphical abstracts, or other visual materials.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that:

  • AI-generated visual materials accurately represent the research;
  • the use of AI does not misrepresent scientific evidence;
  • applicable copyright and licensing requirements are respected; and
  • appropriate disclosure is provided.

Where necessary, TMJ may request original or pre-AI source materials for editorial assessment.

5. Policy for Reviewers

Peer review is a confidential process.

Reviewers must not upload submitted manuscripts, figures, datasets, supplementary files, reviewer reports, or other confidential materials to public or external AI systems where such information may be retained, reused, shared, or processed outside the journal's authorized systems.

Reviewers must not use AI tools to replace their independent scholarly assessment or generate the substantive content of their peer-review reports.

AI tools may only be used in a limited supportive capacity where confidentiality is maintained and the reviewer remains fully responsible for the review.

Reviewers remain solely responsible for:

  • the scientific evaluation of the manuscript;
  • the accuracy of their comments;
  • their recommendations; and
  • the confidentiality of the peer-review process.

This approach is aligned with current Elsevier guidance for reviewers.

6. Policy for Editors

Editors may use AI-assisted technologies only for limited and supportive administrative or editorial purposes, provided that confidentiality is maintained.

Examples may include:

  • language or formatting assistance;
  • administrative workflow support;
  • background literature searches; and
  • identification of obvious inconsistencies requiring human verification.

Editors must not rely on AI systems to independently:

  • evaluate the scientific quality of a manuscript;
  • determine novelty or significance;
  • make acceptance or rejection decisions;
  • replace independent editorial judgment; or
  • generate the final editorial decision.

All editorial decisions remain the responsibility of the Editor or Editorial Board.

Editors must not upload confidential manuscripts or confidential editorial correspondence into unauthorized external AI systems.

7. Confidentiality and Data Protection

All unpublished manuscripts, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, datasets, and supplementary materials must be treated as confidential.

Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff must ensure that confidential or sensitive information is not submitted to AI platforms in a manner that could compromise:

  • confidentiality;
  • privacy;
  • intellectual property;
  • copyright;
  • proprietary information; or
  • research participants' rights.

The use of AI technologies must comply with applicable privacy regulations, intellectual property requirements, research ethics, and the terms of the relevant AI service.

8. Research Integrity and Misconduct

TMJ maintains a zero-tolerance approach toward research misconduct involving AI-assisted technologies.

Prohibited practices include, but are not limited to:

  • fabrication of data or research results;
  • falsification of evidence;
  • plagiarism;
  • fabrication or manipulation of citations;
  • deceptive manipulation of images;
  • misrepresentation of AI-generated content;
  • submission of AI-generated work without appropriate human intellectual contribution; and
  • any other use of AI that compromises research integrity.

Authors remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, validity, and integrity of their published work.

Violations may result in manuscript rejection, correction, retraction, or other appropriate editorial action in accordance with TMJ's publication ethics policies.

9. Editorial Rights and Enforcement

The Editorial Board reserves the right to:

  • request clarification regarding the use of AI;
  • request additional disclosure of AI-assisted activities;
  • request supporting or original materials where appropriate;
  • reject manuscripts that violate this policy;
  • take corrective or retraction action when necessary; and
  • revise this policy in response to developments in AI technology and international publishing standards.

10. Transparency and Accountability

The use of AI does not transfer responsibility from the human contributor to the AI system.

Authors, reviewers, and editors remain accountable for their respective contributions, assessments, recommendations, and decisions.

TMJ considers human oversight, transparency, confidentiality, and accountability to be fundamental requirements for responsible use of AI in scholarly publishing.

Effective Date

This policy becomes effective upon publication on the official website of Technomedia Journal (TMJ) and applies to all manuscripts submitted thereafter.

References

This policy has been developed with consideration of internationally recognized guidance and standards, including:

  • STM. Recommendations for a Classification of AI Use in Academic Manuscript Preparation.
  • Elsevier. Generative AI Policies for Journals.
  • WAME. Chatbots, Generative AI, and Scholarly Manuscripts.
  • COPE. Artificial Intelligence and Authorship Guidance.