Policy on the use of artificial intelligence in the editorial process of the scientific journal “Philosophy of Education”
1. Introduction
This document defines the principles and rules for the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in the preparation, review and publication of materials in the scientific journal “Philosophy of Education” (hereinafter referred to as the Journal). We recognize the potential benefits of using AI to improve the efficiency and quality of scientific publications, but emphasize the need for its ethical, responsible and transparent application in compliance with academic integrity and scientific ethics standards.
2. Scope
This policy applies to all participants in the editorial process of the Journal, including:
- Authors who submit materials to the Journal.
- Reviewers who perform expert evaluation of submitted materials.
- Members of the editorial board and editorial staff.
3. Use of AI tools by authors
Authors may use AI tools to improve the quality of their manuscripts, but subject to the following conditions:
Responsibility for content. Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and authenticity of all content in their manuscripts, including parts created or edited using AI tools. The use of AI does not exempt the author from responsibility for plagiarism, fabrication, falsification of data, or other violations of academic integrity.
Transparency and disclosure. Authors are required to clearly indicate in the "Acknowledgements" section or in a separate subsection "Use of AI Tools" information about the use of AI tools during the preparation of the manuscript. The name of the AI tool, its version, and the purpose of its use (e.g., for text editing, grammar checking, data analysis, image generation, etc.) must be specified.
Restrictions on authorship. AI tools cannot act as authors of manuscripts. Authorship belongs only to individuals who have made a significant intellectual contribution to the research and preparation of the publication.
Verification of generated content. Authors must carefully check any text, data, or images generated by AI tools for accuracy, contextual relevance, and absence of bias or errors.
Use for data analysis. When using AI tools for data analysis, authors should clearly describe the analysis methodology, including the AI tools used, in the "Materials and Methods" section.
Use for image generation. If AI tools were used to generate images or other visual materials, authors should indicate this in the captions for the relevant elements and in the "Use of AI Tools" section.
4. Use of AI tools by reviewers
Reviewers may use AI tools to improve the efficiency of the review process, but subject to the following conditions:
Confidentiality. Reviewers are not permitted to upload confidential manuscript materials (including full text, data, figures, etc.) to AI tools that do not guarantee data confidentiality and security.
Objectivity. The use of AI tools should not affect the objectivity and impartiality of the review. The reviewer is fully responsible for the content of their review.
Disclosure. Reviewers are encouraged to inform the editorial board about the use of AI tools in the preparation of their review, if applicable.
5. Use of AI tools by the editorial board and staff
The editorial board and staff of the Journal may use AI tools to optimize editorial processes, such as
- Plagiarism checking (using specialized tools).
- Checking formatting and compliance with the Journal’s requirements.
- Assistance in selecting potential reviewers.
- Analysis of trends in scientific publications.
At the same time, it is necessary to strictly adhere to the principles of confidentiality, data security, and avoidance of bias that may be inherent in some AI tools. Decisions to accept or reject a manuscript are always made by the editorial board based on scientific merit and compliance with the Journal’s standards, not solely on the results obtained using AI tools.
6. Ethical aspects and responsibility
Plagiarism. Використання тексту, згенерованого інструментами ШІ, без належного зазначення джерела та/або без суттєвої переробки автором, може розглядатися як плагіат.
Bias. Інструменти ШІ можуть генерувати контент, що містить упередження, які відображають дані, на яких вони були навчені. Автори, рецензенти та редакція повинні критично оцінювати результати роботи ШІ та уникати поширення упередженого контенту.
Transparency. Максимальна прозорість щодо використання інструментів ШІ є ключовим елементом відповідальної наукової публікації.
Responsibility. Кінцева відповідальність за дотримання етичних норм та стандартів Журналу лежить на авторах, рецензентах та членах редакційної колегії.
7. Розгляд порушень
Будь-які виявлені випадки неправомірного або неетичного використання інструментів ШІ будуть розглядатися редакційною колегією відповідно до процедур Журналу щодо розгляду порушень публікаційної етики. Це може включати запит на роз’яснення від автора/рецензента, відхилення рукопису, відкликання опублікованої статті або інші заходи.
8. Оновлення політики
Ця політика може бути переглянута та оновлена редакційною колегією Журналу з урахуванням розвитку технологій ШІ та зміни стандартів у науковій спільноті.
