Gen AI Policy

General Principles and Authorship

Studies in English Education and Applied Linguistics recognizes the rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its potential applications in academic research. However, the core principle of scholarly publication remains: humans are fundamentally accountable for the research and the content published.

AI Tools Cannot Be Authors: Artificial Intelligence tools, such as Large Language Models (LLMs) or generative AI systems, do not meet the criteria for authorship. They cannot take responsibility for the work, nor can they assert the presence or absence of conflicts of interest. Therefore, AI tools must not be listed as authors or co-authors on any manuscript submitted to the journal.

Guidelines for Authors

Disclosure of AI Use: Authors who use AI tools in the writing process, data analysis, or the generation of graphical elements must transparently disclose their use. This disclosure should be placed in the "Acknowledgments" or "Methodology" section, specifying the name of the AI tool, the version used, and a brief description of how it was applied in the research process.

Human Accountability: Authors bear full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the content produced by AI tools. Authors must carefully review and edit any AI-generated text to ensure it does not contain factual errors (hallucinations), bias, or plagiarized material.

Language Editing: The use of basic digital tools for spelling, grammar, and general language editing (e.g., Grammarly) does not require explicit disclosure, provided these tools do not alter the intellectual substance or generate new ideas within the manuscript.

Guidelines for Peer Reviewers and Editors

Confidentiality in Peer Review: The peer review process is strictly confidential. Reviewers and editors must not upload submitted manuscripts, in whole or in part, into public generative AI tools (such as ChatGPT). Doing so constitutes a direct violation of the author's confidentiality and copyright, as public AI tools may retain and use the inputted data for training purposes.

Review Evaluation: Peer reviewers are selected for their human expertise and critical judgment. While AI tools may assist in minor tasks (such as checking reference formats or language clarity), the core evaluation of a manuscript's scientific merit, originality, and methodological rigor must be conducted solely by the human reviewer.

Editorial Decisions: Final decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript are the exclusive responsibility of the editorial board. AI tools will not be used to make independent editorial decisions.