Online Statement on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence

Online Statement on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI)

Journal of Asiatic Society for Social Science Research (JASSSR)

The Journal of Asiatic Society for Social Science Research (Online ISSN: 2583-4533; Print ISSN: 3048-9024) is committed to upholding the highest standards of academic integrity, transparency, originality, and human authorship in scholarly publishing. This policy governs the ethical use, disclosure, and oversight of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools in manuscript preparation, peer review, and editorial processes. It is aligned with internationally recognized principles from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), best practices expected for journals seeking or maintaining indexing in Scopus and Web of Science, and emerging norms from the University Grants Commission (UGC) and Ministry of Education, Government of India.

1. Scope and Purpose

This statement applies to all authors, reviewers, and editors involved in the submission, peer review, and publication processes of JASSSR. It aims to ensure that scholarly contributions remain the product of genuine human intellectual effort while permitting limited, transparent, and responsible use of GenAI tools. The policy supports the journal’s commitment to responsible scholarly communication and meets the ethical expectations of major indexing databases.

2. Definition

Generative AI (GenAI) refers to artificial intelligence technologies capable of producing text, images, code, summaries, or other content in response to user prompts. This includes, but is not limited to, tools such as ChatGPT, GPT-based systems, Claude, Gemini, DALL·E, and similar large language models or multimodal systems.

3. Core Principles (Aligned with COPE, Scopus, and Web of Science Expectations)

Human Authorship and Accountability: GenAI tools cannot be credited as authors or co-authors. Authorship requires substantial intellectual contribution, the ability to take responsibility for the work, and accountability for its accuracy and integrity—criteria that only humans can fulfil.
Transparency: Any use of GenAI beyond basic grammar or spelling checks must be clearly disclosed.
Originality and Integrity: The core intellectual content—research design, data analysis and interpretation, formulation of hypotheses or conclusions, and substantive argumentation—must originate from the authors.
Confidentiality: Reviewers and editors must not upload manuscripts or related materials into GenAI systems.

These principles are consistent with COPE’s position on authorship and AI tools, Scopus content policy recommendations for dedicated GenAI policies, and Web of Science expectations regarding publication ethics and transparency.

4. Acceptable Uses of GenAI by Authors

Authors may use GenAI tools for limited, supportive purposes, provided the following conditions are met:

Language refinement (grammar, syntax, clarity, or stylistic editing).
Assistance with formatting, reference organisation, or basic summarisation of publicly available literature (with full human verification).
Generation of non-data-dependent visual aids (e.g., conceptual diagrams) only when the underlying data or ideas are original and the output is thoroughly verified.
Brainstorming research frameworks or exploring literature, without generating original hypotheses, conclusions, or fabricated content.

In line with emerging practices under UGC and Ministry of Education, India frameworks (and institutional implementations thereof), AI-generated or AI-assisted content is permitted up to a maximum of 20% of the manuscript, provided it is fully disclosed, critically reviewed, edited, and verified by the authors. The core scholarly contribution must remain human-authored. The journal’s existing plagiarism threshold (similarity index below 10%, in accordance with UGC norms) continues to apply independently.

5. Prohibited Uses of GenAI

The following are strictly prohibited:

Using GenAI to generate, substantially rewrite, or produce the primary text of the manuscript (introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, or conclusions).
Fabricating or manipulating data, references, results, or conclusions.
Presenting AI-generated content as original human intellectual contribution without disclosure.
Listing GenAI tools as authors or co-authors.
Uploading confidential manuscripts or peer-review materials into public GenAI systems.
Any use that results in undisclosed AI content exceeding the 20% threshold or that undermines the originality required for academic authorship.

6. Disclosure Requirements

All authors must include a clear declaration regarding GenAI use (or non-use) in the submitted manuscript. If GenAI tools were used, the statement must specify:

The name(s) and version(s) of the tool(s).
The specific purpose(s) and sections affected.
Confirmation that all outputs were reviewed, edited, and fact-checked by the authors, who take full responsibility for the final content.

Recommended formats (place in the Methods section, Acknowledgements, or a dedicated declaration immediately before the References):

If no GenAI was used:

“The authors declare that no generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools were used in the writing, generation, or substantive modification of this manuscript, nor in the analysis, interpretation, or presentation of the research findings. The authors take full responsibility for the originality, accuracy, and integrity of the submitted work.”

If limited GenAI assistance was used:

“During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [Tool Name and Version] on [Date or Month/Year] to assist with [specific purpose, e.g., language editing for clarity / summarising publicly available literature]. All outputs were critically reviewed, edited, and verified by the authors. AI-assisted content constitutes no more than 20% of the manuscript. The authors assume full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the published work.”

Failure to disclose, or inaccurate disclosure, will be treated as a breach of publication ethics.

7. Use of GenAI in Peer Review

Reviewers are strictly prohibited from using GenAI tools to prepare peer-review reports or to process manuscript content. Peer review requires independent expert judgment and strict confidentiality. Uploading any part of a manuscript into a GenAI system constitutes a breach of confidentiality and ethical standards. Any suspected use will be investigated.

8. Editorial Oversight and Compliance

The editorial office reserves the right to:

Request clarification or additional disclosure regarding GenAI use.
Employ plagiarism-detection and AI-detection tools as part of the screening process.
Investigate suspected undisclosed or excessive GenAI use.

This policy supports the journal’s alignment with the ethical and transparency criteria expected by Scopus and Web of Science selection processes.

9. Consequences of Misuse

Violations will be handled in accordance with COPE guidelines and the journal’s procedures for academic misconduct. Possible actions include:

Return of the manuscript for revision or rejection.
Retraction of published articles if ethical breaches are discovered post-publication.
Notification to the authors’ institutions or relevant authorities where appropriate.

In cases involving excessive or undisclosed AI content (particularly where it exceeds the 20% guidance or the journal’s 10% similarity threshold), the manuscript may be rejected or subject to the same sanctions applied to plagiarism under UGC norms.

10. Alignment with National and International Standards

This policy is informed by:

COPE Position Statement on Authorship and AI Tools.
Scopus recommendations for journals to maintain clear GenAI policies promoting transparency.
Web of Science expectations regarding research integrity and ethical publishing.
UGC (Promotion of Academic Integrity and Prevention of Plagiarism in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2018, and emerging institutional practices under the Ministry of Education, India, that treat unacknowledged AI use as a form of academic misconduct while permitting limited, disclosed assistance (commonly capped around 20% in several university implementations).

The Journal of Asiatic Society for Social Science Research remains committed to fostering rigorous, original, and ethically sound scholarship. Authors are encouraged to prioritise human intellectual contribution and to contact the editorial office with any questions regarding this policy prior to submission.