AI Policies

The Journal of Prajna Ashram recognizes the value and potential of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and large language models (LLMs) in assisting authors in the research and writing process. The use of GenAI in academic research and writing is rapidly expanding, offering convenience and efficiency in producing scholarly work. However, it cannot replace human creativity and critical thinking. Authors should also be mindful of potential issues such as plagiarism arising from content reproduction, the generation of false information, factual inaccuracies, or biases inherent in these tools.

 

This policy has been developed to promote transparency and to help authors, reviewers, and editors make ethical decisions regarding the use of such tools. The Ashram Journal of Philosophy will continue to monitor and update this policy to ensure its alignment with technological advancements.

 

Authors

Authors are responsible for the accuracy and integrity of their manuscripts, ensuring thorough review and revision before submission. They must confirm that their work is original, that they are the rightful authors, and that their manuscript does not infringe upon the rights of others. Authors are encouraged to review the journal’s publication ethics policy before submitting their work.

 

Authors may use GenAI to improve the language and readability of their manuscripts, ensuring that their text is free of grammatical, spelling, punctuation, and stylistic errors. This includes rewording and formatting adjustments but does not extend to generating content automatically under any circumstances. GenAI should only be used to refine content that the authors themselves have created, not to generate entirely new material.

 

The Journal of Prajna Ashram does not permit GenAI to be listed as an author. These tools do not meet the criteria for authorship, as they cannot take responsibility for their work, disclose conflicts of interest, adhere to ethical standards, or engage in legal proceedings.

 

The journal does not allow authors to use GenAI for drafting any part of a manuscript, including the abstract and literature review.

 

The journal prohibits the use of GenAI to create or modify illustrations in the manuscript, including adding, removing, relocating, or altering specific features due to copyright concerns and the need to maintain the integrity of the manuscript.

 

The journal does not permit the use of GenAI for data analysis, statistical reporting, or interpretation of results. Authors are responsible for writing and critically evaluating their work to ensure the accuracy and completeness of their findings.

 

Exception: If authors use GenAI as part of their research design or methodology, they must transparently describe their use of the tool in a reproducible manner. This should be documented under the Methodology section or in a Declaration of GenAI Use, specifying the tool’s name, version, and justification for its use.

 

If an editor finds that a manuscript has improperly used GenAI without disclosure, has generated misleading content, engaged in plagiarism, or improperly cited sources, the editor reserves the right to reject the submission at any stage of the publication process. Editorial decisions are final.

 

Reviewers

Reviewers must not upload manuscripts or any portion of a manuscript under review into GenAI tools, as this may violate confidentiality and copyright protections. Additionally, these tools pose risks by potentially generating inaccurate, incomplete, or biased conclusions.

 

Reviewers play a crucial role in scholarly publishing. Their evaluations and recommendations guide editorial decisions, ensuring that published works are accurate, precise, and credible. Editors select reviewers based on their expertise, ensuring they possess in-depth knowledge relevant to the manuscript’s subject or methodology. This level of expertise is irreplaceable by GenAI.

 

Reviewers are responsible for the accuracy and perspective presented in their assessments. The peer-review process is built on trust between authors, reviewers, and editors, which must be upheld to maintain the integrity of academic publishing.

 

Editors

Editors must not upload manuscripts or any portion of a manuscript under review into GenAI tools, as this may compromise confidentiality and copyright protections. These tools also carry risks of generating inaccurate, incomplete, or biased conclusions.

 

The editorial assessment of manuscripts is a responsibility that requires human judgment. Editors should not use GenAI in the evaluation or decision-making process, as the preliminary review and critical analysis necessary for manuscript assessment fall beyond the capabilities of these tools. Editors are accountable for overseeing the review process, making final decisions, and communicating with authors.