Generative AI Usage Policy

Verdict: Journal of Law Science recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies may support certain research and editorial activities. However, their use must not compromise academic integrity, research transparency, originality, data reliability, confidentiality, or the accountability of authors and editorial personnel.


1. Permitted Uses of AI

AI tools may be used for the following purposes, provided that their use does not compromise research integrity or replace the author's scholarly judgment.

  1. Proofreading and Language Editing. Authors may use AI tools to identify grammatical errors, spelling mistakes, punctuation problems, and language inconsistencies. AI may also assist with improving sentence clarity and readability. However, AI tools must not be used to generate substantive article content, develop arguments, formulate research findings, or produce interpretations and conclusions on behalf of the authors. Authors remain responsible for the originality, accuracy, and meaning of the manuscript.
  2. Plagiarism and Similarity Checking. AI-assisted tools and similarity-detection software may be used to identify potentially overlapping text, unattributed material, and possible citation problems.

Authors must independently verify the results and address any legitimate concerns before submission. AI-generated similarity assessments or AI-detection scores must not be treated as conclusive evidence of plagiarism or misconduct. The journal evaluates potential plagiarism using appropriate evidence and established editorial procedures.

  1. Finding and Organizing References. AI tools may assist authors in identifying potentially relevant scholarly literature, organizing bibliographic information, and formatting references according to the journal's requirements. Authors must independently verify every reference against the original publication or a reliable bibliographic source, including the accuracy of author names, article titles, publication years, journal names, page numbers, and DOI links where available. Fabricated, unverifiable, or incorrectly attributed references are unacceptable. AI tools must not be used to replace critical engagement with the original sources or to misrepresent the content of cited publications.
  2. Research Data Analysis. AI tools may assist with appropriate analytical tasks, including organizing datasets, supporting statistical or computational analysis, identifying patterns, and assisting with coding or analytical workflows. Authors must verify the validity of the methods, the accuracy of the outputs, and the reproducibility of the analytical procedures. The use of AI must not involve fabricating, falsifying, selectively altering, or misrepresenting research data, analytical results, or findings.
  3. Illustrations, Diagrams, and Flowcharts. AI tools may be used to create conceptual illustrations, diagrams, flowcharts, and other visual materials intended to explain theoretical frameworks, research procedures, or conceptual relationships. Such materials must accurately represent the authors' intended concepts and must not mislead readers regarding original research data, empirical findings, or evidence. AI-generated visuals must not be presented as authentic research images, observations, or experimental results. Authors are responsible for verifying the accuracy, relevance, and integrity of all visual materials and must disclose AI use where required under this policy.

Authors must also ensure that data submitted to external AI systems do not violate confidentiality, privacy, informed consent, intellectual property rights, or other applicable restrictions.


2. Prohibited Uses of Generative AI

The following uses of generative AI are prohibited in manuscripts submitted to the journal.

  1. Generating Article Content. Generative AI must not be used to create substantive manuscript content, including the research rationale, literature review, theoretical argument, analysis, interpretation, discussion, or conclusions. Authors must develop the scholarly content of their manuscripts themselves and remain fully responsible for the originality and intellectual contribution of their work. Limited AI-assisted proofreading and language editing are permitted.
  2. Fabrication or Manipulation of Research Data. AI must not be used to fabricate research data, invent participants or observations, falsify results, manipulate evidence, or produce misleading analytical outputs. The generation or alteration of research materials in ways that misrepresent the evidence or compromise the authenticity of findings is prohibited. Any permitted computational or AI-assisted analysis must be methodologically appropriate, transparently documented, and independently verified by the authors.
  3. Peer Review Process. Reviewers must not use generative AI tools to summarize, analyze, evaluate, or prepare reports on submitted manuscripts. They must conduct their assessments independently and base their recommendations on their own scholarly expertise. Submitted manuscripts, unpublished research findings, reviewer reports, and editorial correspondence are confidential and must not be uploaded to external AI systems.
  4. Editorial Assessment and Decision-Making. Editors and editorial staff must not use generative AI to review, evaluate, summarize, rank, or make editorial decisions concerning submitted manuscripts. Editorial assessments and decisions must be based on independent scholarly judgment, the journal's editorial criteria, and applicable publication ethics standards. Editors must not upload manuscripts, reviewer reports, confidential correspondence, or unpublished research materials to generative AI systems.
  5. Misrepresentation and Research Misconduct. The use of AI to fabricate citations, misrepresent sources, conceal plagiarism, falsify analytical procedures, or mislead editors and readers is prohibited. AI tools must not be used to evade plagiarism screening, circumvent editorial requirements, or misrepresent the originality, authorship, or reliability of research.


3. Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose any use of AI tools in preparing or analyzing a manuscript, including permitted uses for proofreading, reference organization, and data analysis. The disclosure should identify the AI tool used, its purpose, and the relevant stage of the research or manuscript preparation process. Where AI has contributed to data analysis, authors should describe its role and the verification procedures applied.

The disclosure must be included in a dedicated Declaration of Generative AI Use section in the manuscript, preferably before the References section. For example:

  1. When AI tools have been used: During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of AI tool] for [specific purpose]. The authors reviewed and verified the resulting outputs and take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the published work."
  2. When no AI tools have been used: The authors declare that no generative AI tools were used in the preparation or analysis of this manuscript."

The declaration does not authorize any use prohibited by this policy.


4. Authors' Responsibilities

Authors are fully responsible for all content submitted to and published by the journal, regardless of whether permitted AI tools have been used.

Authors must:

  1. Ensure the originality, accuracy, and integrity of their manuscripts.
  2. Use AI tools only for purposes permitted under this policy.
  3. Verify AI-assisted outputs, references, analytical results, and factual information.
  4. Disclose AI use accurately and transparently.
  5. Protect confidential, personal, proprietary, and culturally sensitive information.
  6. Ensure that AI-assisted activities comply with applicable research ethics and intellectual property requirements.
  7. Correct any errors or misleading information resulting from AI use.

AI systems cannot be listed as authors or assume responsibility for scholarly work. Authorship must reflect genuine intellectual contributions and accountability in accordance with the journal's authorship policy.


5. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts independently and must not use generative AI tools at any stage of manuscript assessment.

Reviewers are responsible for maintaining confidentiality, providing evidence-based assessments, identifying potential methodological or ethical concerns, and submitting recommendations based on their own expertise.

Any suspected misuse of AI or other research integrity concerns should be reported directly to the editorial office through the journal's established procedures.


6. Responsibilities of Editors and Editorial Staff

Editors and editorial staff must uphold the confidentiality, impartiality, and integrity of the editorial process.

Generative AI must not be used to evaluate manuscripts, prepare peer-review reports, formulate editorial recommendations, or make publication decisions. Editors must independently assess submissions and ensure that manuscripts are handled according to the journal's editorial and ethical standards.

The editorial team may use appropriate non-generative administrative or similarity-checking tools in accordance with the journal's procedures, provided that confidentiality is maintained and the tools do not replace independent editorial judgment.

In this regard, the editor requires manuscripts to demonstrate at least 75% originality, with a similarity index of not exceeding 20%. If the similarity-checking of AI results exceed 20%, authors are expected to revise their manuscripts to reduce the similarity index to an acceptable level. This process is further explained in detail in the journal’s peer-review process.


7. Violations and Editorial Actions

Failure to comply with this policy may constitute a research integrity or publication ethics concern.

Where suspected violations arise, the editorial team may request clarification, supporting documentation, or an explanation of the AI tools and procedures used. The journal will assess each case fairly and proportionately.

Depending on the nature and severity of the violation, possible actions include requesting revisions, rejecting a manuscript, suspending editorial consideration, issuing a correction, or retracting a published article where warranted. Serious concerns will be handled in accordance with the journal's Research Misconduct Policy and other applicable publication ethics procedures.


8. Policy Implementation and Review

This policy applies to all authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff involved in the submission, assessment, and publication of manuscripts in Verdict: Journal of Law Science. The journal will implement this policy consistently to protect research integrity, editorial independence, confidentiality, and scholarly accountability.

The policy may be reviewed periodically to reflect developments in AI technology, research ethics, and scholarly publishing standards. (Source: https://doi.org/10.24318/cCVRZBms)