AI Tools Usage Policy

Introduction

Accesso Journal recognizes the transformative potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in scholarly publishing. From enhancing language clarity to facilitating data analysis and automating content generation, AI tools can benefit authors and increase productivity. However, their use must be managed carefully to uphold academic integrity, originality, transparency, and accountability.

This policy outlines the journal's position on the ethical and responsible use of AI tools in manuscript preparation. This policy aims to provide clear boundaries, prevent misunderstandings, and align with the Core Practices and discussion documents of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) on AI in decision-making.

Definition 

For the purposes of this policy, AI tools refer to digital systems, platforms, or software that use artificial intelligence techniques—such as machine learning (ML), natural language processing (NLP), and deep learning—to generate, analyze, translate, summarize, or modify textual, numerical, visual, or audio data in a research context.

Examples include but are not limited to:

  • Generative AI tools like ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and other large language models (LLMs)

  • Writing and grammar tools like Grammarly, DeepL Write, and Quillbot

  • AI-based data analysis and visualization software

  • AI systems used to create images, graphs, or statistical models

  • AI-powered literature review and citation generators

Permissible Use of AI Tools

Authors may use AI tools for specific purposes if the following conditions are met:

a. Permitted Uses

  • Checking grammar, spelling, and punctuation.

  • Improving linguistic clarity, style, and tone.

  • Formatting references and citations.

  • Conducting preliminary literature searches.

  • Supporting, but not replacing, statistical analysis or modeling.

  • Generating basic visual aids or illustrations (if sourced and ethically reviewed).

  • Maximum Turnitin result for AI writing detection: 20%. Authors are required to adjust their manuscript if the result is higher than 20%.

b. Restricted Uses
AI tools must not be used for:

  • Generating the entire manuscript or substantial portions of original content without proper attribution and critical review.

  • Fabricating or manipulating data, images, or findings.

  • Translating text without human verification.

  • Automatically summarizing or rephrasing published work in a way that constitutes plagiarism.

  • Creating content that infringes copyright or reproduces identifiable material from third parties without permission.

Author Responsibility

Authors bear full responsibility for all content submitted to the journal. This includes content created or modified using AI software. Authors must:

  • Verify the accuracy, originality, and reliability of all AI-assisted content.

  • Ensure the absence of plagiarism, bias, factual errors, or hallucinations.

  • Attribute external data, sources, or identifiable material used or suggested by AI.

  • Accept full responsibility for any errors, omissions, or ethical violations resulting from AI-assisted work.

  • Critically review and edit all outputs from AI tools to ensure they meet scholarly and disciplinary standards.

Authorship and Artificial Intelligence (AI)

AI tools cannot be credited as authors or co-authors. Authorship is restricted to individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research and can be held accountable for its content.

Including an AI tool in the author list, author notes, or author contribution statement is strictly prohibited and may result in rejection or retraction.

Disclosure Requirements

Authors must provide complete and transparent disclosure if AI tools are used beyond permitted uses. The disclosure should include:

  • The name, version, and developer or provider of the AI tool used.

  • A clear description of the purpose and extent of its use.

  • A statement confirming that the authors reviewed and are responsible for all AI-assisted content.

Location of Disclosure in the Manuscript

Depending on how the AI tool was used, disclosure should appear in one or more of the following manuscript sections:

a. Methods Section
If the tool contributed to data analysis, image generation, coding, or other parts of the research methodology.

b. Acknowledgements Section
If the tool was used for writing enhancement, translation, or formatting.

c. Special Statement Section
Authors are strongly encouraged to include a separate section titled "Declaration of AI Tool Usage" with wording such as:

"During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [insert AI tool name (version, and developer)] to [provide a clear description of the purpose and extent of use]. All AI-generated outputs were critically reviewed and thoroughly edited by the author(s) to ensure factual accuracy, clarity of expression, and adherence to academic standards. The author(s) take full responsibility for the integrity and content of this manuscript."

Editorial Oversight and Peer Review

Editors and peer reviewers will evaluate AI disclosure as part of the ethical and methodological assessment of the manuscript. If undisclosed or inappropriate use of AI is suspected, the editorial office may:

  • Request clarification or revision from the authors.

  • Reject the manuscript.

  • Refer the case to an institution or initiate a formal investigation if misconduct is suspected.

Accesso Journal will not rely solely on automatic detection software to assess the origin of content. All assessments will involve human oversight and direct communication with the authors.

Consequences of Non-Compliance

Failure to comply with this policy may result in:

  • Rejection of the manuscript at any review stage.

  • Retraction of the article after publication.

  • Notification to the author's institution in cases of suspected misconduct.

  • A ban on future submissions by the author in cases of severe or repeated misuse.

Appeals and Dispute Resolution

If an author contests an editorial decision related to AI use, they may submit a formal written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief. The appeal must