Artificial Intelligence Policy

Artificial Intelligence Policy

Responsible AI use in writing and editorial work, with a complete prohibition on AI use in peer review.

1. Scope

This policy applies to generative AI and AI-assisted systems used to create, transform, summarize, translate, classify, analyze, or evaluate text, code, images, audio, video, data, or other scholarly material. It applies to authors, editors, editorial staff, and peer reviewers involved with FUADUNA.

2. Policy for Authors

Authors remain fully responsible for all submitted and published content, including material produced or modified with AI assistance.

• AI is not an author: an AI tool cannot be listed as an author, co-author, or accountable contributor.
• Permitted support: authors may use AI for limited language improvement, brainstorming, coding support, organization, translation, or analytical assistance when appropriate, provided the output is critically verified and does not replace the author's intellectual contribution.
• Mandatory disclosure: substantive AI use that affects text generation, translation, coding, data processing, analysis, figures, or interpretation must be disclosed in the manuscript.
• Verification: authors must independently verify facts, quotations, references, DOI information, translations, calculations, code, and interpretations. AI-generated references or claims must never be accepted without checking the original source.
• Confidentiality and rights: authors must not upload confidential, personal, copyrighted, culturally restricted, or sensitive material to an AI service unless they are authorized to do so and the service provides appropriate data protection.
• Research evidence: AI-generated or AI-altered images, audio, quotations, interview material, historical evidence, participant statements, or data must not be represented as authentic empirical evidence. When AI is itself part of the research method or object of study, its role must be described transparently.

3. Author Disclosure Statement

When disclosure is required, authors should include a statement before the References section. A suitable format is:

Basic spelling, grammar, and punctuation correction that does not generate substantive content normally does not require a separate declaration. When AI use forms part of the research method, the Methods section must provide enough information for readers to understand and evaluate the procedure.

4. Prohibited Uses by Authors

• Listing an AI system as an author or responsible contributor.
• Using AI to fabricate, falsify, or manipulate research data, quotations, participants, interviews, archival records, or findings.
• Submitting AI-generated references, quotations, or factual claims without verification against original sources.
• Using AI to conceal plagiarism, duplicate publication, authorship manipulation, or other misconduct.
• Delegating the core scholarly argument, interpretation, or conclusions to AI without meaningful human intellectual responsibility.

5. Policy for Editors

Editors may not use AI to replace scientific judgment or editorial decision-making. Editors remain accountable for confidentiality, fairness, integrity, and every decision taken in the editorial process.

• Do not upload submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, author correspondence, confidential data, or identifying information to public or unapproved AI systems.
• AI must not determine desk rejection, reviewer selection, acceptance, revision, rejection, correction, or retraction decisions.
• Limited AI assistance may be used for non-confidential administrative tasks only when human oversight is maintained and no confidential manuscript content is exposed.
• Substantive AI use by the editorial team should be documented and disclosed where it materially affects editorial communication or workflow.
• Editors must independently verify any AI-assisted output and remain fully responsible for the resulting action.

6. Absolute Prohibition for Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers must not use AI in the peer-review process. This prohibition is required by the Indonesian 2026 technical guidelines for scientific journal accreditation and protects both the independence of scholarly judgment and manuscript confidentiality.

• Do not use AI to read, summarize, interpret, analyze, evaluate, score, compare, or assess a submitted manuscript.
• Do not use AI to generate, rewrite, polish, or prepare reviewer comments or recommendations.
• Do not upload or paste any manuscript text, abstract, figure, table, reference list, supplementary file, data, reviewer note, or confidential correspondence into an AI application.
• Reviewers who cannot complete the review independently must inform the editor and decline or return the assignment.

7. Non-Compliance

Undisclosed or unethical AI use may lead to a request for explanation, revision, additional documentation, rejection, withdrawal of an editorial decision, correction, retraction, or other proportionate action under the journal's Publication Ethics policy. The journal will assess the evidence and effect on reliability rather than treating an AI-detection score as conclusive proof of misconduct.