AI Tools Usage Policy

AI Tools and Generative AI Usage Policy

Introduction

Jurnal Risalah Dakwah (JRD) recognizes the growing role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and generative AI technologies in scholarly communication. These technologies may assist authors in improving language quality, organizing ideas, supporting data-related tasks, and enhancing the presentation of academic work. At the same time, their use raises important concerns regarding originality, transparency, authorship, accountability, confidentiality, and research integrity.

JRD therefore permits the use of AI tools only in a limited, ethical, and transparent manner. This policy is intended to provide clear guidance to authors, editors, and reviewers regarding acceptable and unacceptable uses of AI in the preparation, submission, review, and publication of manuscripts. It also reflects the journal’s commitment to internationally recognized publication ethics principles, including those promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

As a practical analogy, AI in academic publishing may be compared to a sophisticated editorial assistant: it may help improve expression or streamline certain processes, but it cannot replace the scholarly judgment, intellectual contribution, or ethical responsibility of human authors and editors.

1. Definition of AI Tools

For the purposes of this policy, AI tools refer to software applications, platforms, or systems that use artificial intelligence techniques, including but not limited to machine learning (ML), natural language processing (NLP), deep learning, generative modeling, or related computational methods, to generate, revise, translate, summarize, analyze, or visualize content.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

  1. generative AI and large language models, such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and similar systems;

  2. writing and editing tools, such as Grammarly, DeepL Write, QuillBot, and related applications;

  3. AI-assisted software for data analysis, coding, or visualization;

  4. AI tools used for generating figures, tables, graphs, or statistical representations;

  5. AI-assisted literature discovery, citation support, or reference-formatting tools.

2. General Principle

AI tools may be used only as assistive instruments. They must not replace the author’s original intellectual work, critical reasoning, interpretation, methodological control, or ethical accountability. All submitted manuscripts must remain the product of meaningful human scholarly contribution.

Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy, validity, originality, sourcing, and integrity of all material included in their manuscripts, including any content that has been drafted, refined, translated, summarized, or otherwise processed with AI assistance.

3. Acceptable Uses of AI Tools

JRD permits the limited use of AI tools for the following purposes, provided that authors critically review and verify all outputs before submission:

  1. correcting grammar, spelling, punctuation, and syntax;

  2. improving clarity, coherence, readability, tone, or language style;

  3. assisting with translation, provided that disciplinary terminology and contextual meaning are verified by the author;

  4. supporting preliminary brainstorming, outline development, or organizational structuring;

  5. formatting references or citations, subject to manual checking by the author;

  6. conducting preliminary literature discovery;

  7. supporting, but not replacing, statistical modeling, coding assistance, or data-related technical tasks;

  8. creating visual aids, figures, or illustrations, provided that they are ethically sourced, accurately labeled, and critically reviewed.

A real-world example would be an author using AI to improve the fluency of an article on digital da‘wah communication, then manually checking every quotation, citation, Qur’anic reference, and theoretical claim before submission. In such a case, AI functions as a technical assistant, not as a source of scholarly authority.

4. Prohibited Uses of AI Tools

AI tools must not be used to:

  1. generate entire manuscripts or substantial portions of scholarly content without meaningful human authorship and oversight;

  2. fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or embellish data, interview excerpts, field notes, observations, transcripts, visuals, or findings;

  3. produce analytical claims, interpretations, or conclusions that are not grounded in verified evidence;

  4. generate false, misleading, incomplete, or non-existent references, citations, quotations, page numbers, DOIs, or bibliographic records;

  5. paraphrase, summarize, or translate published works in ways that conceal plagiarism or misrepresent original authorship;

  6. create or modify images, figures, or data visualizations in a deceptive or academically misleading manner;

  7. upload confidential, personal, unpublished, proprietary, or sensitive materials to AI systems if doing so may compromise privacy, copyright, confidentiality, anonymity, or data security;

  8. infringe copyright or use third-party materials without authorization;

  9. substitute for the author’s own scholarly interpretation, argument development, or disciplinary judgment.

An easy analogy is this: using AI to polish a sentence is like asking a proofreader for help; using AI to invent interview results is like submitting fieldwork that never happened. The first may be acceptable, the second is a serious ethical breach.

5. Author Responsibilities

Authors bear full responsibility for all content submitted to JRD, whether created directly by the authors or refined with AI assistance. Authors must:

  1. ensure the accuracy, originality, reliability, and scholarly soundness of all content;

  2. carefully review and revise any AI-assisted output;

  3. identify and correct hallucinations, fabricated references, factual errors, bias, and misleading statements;

  4. ensure that all citations, quotations, and references are accurate and correspond to genuine, consultable sources;

  5. verify that AI-assisted text does not constitute plagiarism, patchwriting, or inappropriate paraphrasing;

  6. ensure that any use of AI complies with applicable ethical, legal, copyright, privacy, and data protection standards;

  7. accept full accountability for any errors, ethical breaches, or misrepresentations associated with AI use.

In practice, this means that if an AI tool inserts a non-existent journal article into a literature review, responsibility remains with the author, just as it would if the author had copied an unchecked reference from an unreliable secondary source.

6. Authorship and AI

AI tools are not eligible for authorship or co-authorship under any circumstances. Authorship is reserved exclusively for human individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to the work and who can assume responsibility for its content, approve its final version, and respond to questions regarding its accuracy and integrity.

Accordingly:

  1. AI tools must not be listed as authors or co-authors;

  2. AI tools must not be listed as contributors in a way that implies authorship status;

  3. naming an AI system in the author byline, contributor list, or equivalent authorship field is strictly prohibited.

Any attempt to attribute authorship to AI may result in rejection, correction, or retraction, depending on the stage and severity of the case.

7. Disclosure Requirements

JRD requires transparent disclosure of substantive AI use in manuscript preparation. Where AI tools have materially assisted in drafting, revising, translating, analyzing, coding, visualizing, or otherwise shaping the manuscript, authors must disclose:

  1. the name of the AI tool;

  2. the version, where applicable;

  3. the developer or provider of the tool, where relevant;

  4. the purpose of its use;

  5. the extent of its use;

  6. a statement confirming that the authors reviewed, verified, and take full responsibility for all AI-assisted content.

Minor use limited to routine spelling or grammar correction may not always require detailed disclosure; however, JRD strongly encourages transparency whenever AI has had more than negligible influence on the preparation of the manuscript.

8. Placement of AI Disclosure in Manuscripts

Depending on the nature of the AI use, disclosure should appear in one or more of the following locations:

  1. Methods Section
    If AI tools were used in research-related processes such as data analysis, coding, transcription support, programming, visualization, or figure generation.

  2. Acknowledgments Section
    If AI tools were used primarily for language improvement, translation, editorial support, or formatting.

  3. cDedicated Statement Section
    Authors are encouraged to include a separate section titled:

Declaration of AI Tool Usage

Suggested wording:

During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [name of AI tool], version [x], developed by [developer/provider], for [state purpose, e.g., language editing, structural refinement, preliminary literature discovery, or figure support]. All AI-assisted content was critically reviewed, revised, and verified by the author(s). The author(s) accept full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and final content of this manuscript.

9. Editorial and Peer Review Oversight

Editors and reviewers will take disclosed AI use into account as part of their ethical, methodological, and editorial assessment of submitted manuscripts. If undisclosed, inappropriate, or potentially misleading AI use is suspected, the editorial team may:

  1. request clarification from the author(s);

  2. request revision or additional disclosure;

  3. reject the manuscript;

  4. initiate further ethical review;

  5. where warranted, refer the matter to the author’s institution or appropriate authority in accordance with publication ethics procedures.

JRD does not rely solely on automated detection tools to determine whether AI has been used improperly. All such evaluations remain subject to human editorial judgment, evidence-based review, and direct communication with authors.

10. Use of AI by Editors and Reviewers

JRD does not permit AI tools to autonomously determine editorial outcomes or peer review decisions. Editorial and peer-review judgments must remain the responsibility of qualified human editors and reviewers.

In addition:

  1. editors and reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts, reviewer comments, editorial correspondence, or related confidential materials to public or insecure AI platforms;

  2. AI tools must not be used in ways that compromise manuscript confidentiality, blind review, anonymity, copyright, or data protection obligations;

  3. limited AI use for administrative or linguistic support may be acceptable only when confidentiality is preserved and human oversight is maintained at all times.

A useful analogy here is that AI may assist with clerical support, but it cannot sit in place of the editor at the decision desk.

11. Consequences of Non-Compliance

Failure to comply with this policy may result in one or more of the following actions:

  1. immediate rejection of the manuscript;

  2. request for correction, revision, or formal disclosure;

  3. withdrawal of an accepted manuscript before publication;

  4. post-publication correction or editorial notice;

  5. retraction of a published article;

  6. formal notification to the author’s affiliated institution, where serious misconduct is suspected;

  7. prohibition from future submissions in severe or repeated cases.

The editorial response will be proportionate to the seriousness, scope, and intent of the violation.

12. Appeals and Dispute Resolution

Authors who disagree with an editorial decision regarding AI-related concerns may submit a formal written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief. The appeal should clearly explain the grounds for disagreement, provide supporting evidence, and refer to the relevant provisions of this policy.

Appeals will be reviewed internally in accordance with the journal’s ethics procedures. Where necessary, JRD may seek further ethical guidance consistent with established publication ethics frameworks.

13. Policy Updates and Author Guidance

Because AI technologies and related ethical concerns are evolving rapidly, JRD reserves the right to review and revise this policy periodically. Authors are expected to consult the most current version of the policy before submission and to contact the editorial office if they are uncertain whether a particular use of AI is permissible.

JRD encourages innovation in scholarly communication, but only in ways that remain consistent with academic rigor, ethical responsibility, and publication integrity.

14. Ethical Framework and References

This policy is informed by internationally recognized publication ethics principles, particularly guidance associated with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including:

  1. COPE Core Practices

  2. COPE guidance and discussion documents on artificial intelligence in editorial and publishing workflows

  3. COPE guidance on authorship and contributorship

  4. COPE retraction guidance

All authors, editors, and reviewers engaging with JRD are expected to adhere to these principles as part of the journal’s broader commitment to ethical scholarly publishing.

Short Version for Author Guidelines

AI Tools and Generative AI Usage Policy

JRD permits the limited and transparent use of AI tools for language editing, readability improvement, translation support, preliminary structuring, literature discovery, and certain technical or visual assistance. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, citations, analysis, conclusions, and ethical integrity of their manuscripts. AI tools must not be used to fabricate data, generate false references, produce unsupported analysis, conceal plagiarism, or replace meaningful human authorship. Any substantive use of AI must be clearly disclosed in the manuscript, including the name of the tool, its purpose, and the extent of use. AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Editors and reviewers must also ensure that AI use does not compromise confidentiality, peer-review integrity, or editorial independence.

Optional Submission Form Statement

AI Disclosure Statement
The author(s) declare that any use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in the preparation of this manuscript has been limited, transparent, critically reviewed, and fully verified. The author(s) retain full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and final content of the submission.