About the Journal

Focus and Scope

This journal focuses on the intersection of arts, culture, and design, with a particular emphasis on traditional and contemporary expressions in Indonesia. The scope includes but is not limited to:

  • Performing Arts: Analysis and critique of traditional and modern dances, including the creation, hybridity, and authenticity of new works.
  • Visual Arts & Design: The study of art creation methods, such as batik painting, and the adaptation of traditional stories and reliefs into contemporary visual forms like animation.
  • Media and Communication: The application of design principles in the creation of visual media, particularly animation, for storytelling and communication.

Cultural Adaptation: The process of transforming characters and narratives from traditional sources into new, accessible formats while maintaining cultural relevance.

Peer Review Process

The review process combines a double blind reviewing and an open reviewing.
The editors will assess whether the submission is eligible for review. After this formal assessment, if positive, the submission will be sent to two external referees.

Based on the review reports the editors will make one of the following decisions:

  1. The submission is rejected. In this case, a written explanation will be provided.
  2. The submission is rejected in its current state. In this case, the author will have the opportunity to re-submit the paper, taking into account the comments of the referees and the editor. When the submission is rejected in its current state (B) and the author wants to improve the paper, the editor assigned to that paper will support the author.
  3. The submission is accepted.

The accepted papers can be published in the blog of the journal for an open reviewing process. The aim of this second reviewing is to promote the improvement of the contents to be published in the journal. The editors will work with the authors and discuss the results of the open review process.

The whole review process will take not more than six months.
Editorial, Interviews and Book Reviews will not be peer reviewed.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

This journal is open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author. This is in accordance with Budapest Open Access Initiative.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Our Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement are based on COPEs Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. As such, this journal follows the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers.

A selection of key points is included below, but you should always refer to the three documents listed above for full details.

Duties of Editors

Fair play and editorial independence

Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit {importance, originality, studys validity, clarity} and its relevance to the journals scope, without regard to the authors race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.

Publication decisions

The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

Editors {in conjunction with the publisher and/or society} will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. AP-SMART editors follow the COPE Flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct. If, on investigation, the ethical concern is well-founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern or other note as may be relevant, will be published in the journal.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavour. AP-SMART shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to the scientific process have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

Promptness

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief {who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances}. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript {published or unpublished} of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewers own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewers personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication {preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data centre}, provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

Originality and plagiarism

Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper {without attribution}, to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication

Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.

The publication of some kinds of articles {such as clinical guidelines, translations} in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Authorship of the manuscript

Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: {i} made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and {ii} drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and {iii} have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript {such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support} but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors {according to the above definition} and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Authors should—at the earliest stage possible {generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript}—disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed {including the grant number or other reference number if any}.

Acknowledgement of sources

Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately {from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties} must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author{s} of the work involved in these services.

Hazards and human or animal subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee{s} has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.

Peer review

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.

Fundamental errors in published works

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journals editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.

Duties of the Publisher

Handling of unethical publishing behaviour

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

Access to journal content

The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive.

Section A: Publication and authorship

  1. All submitted papers are subject to strict peer-review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper.
  2. Review process are blind peer review.
  3. The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language.
  4. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
  5. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
  6. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
  7. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
  8. No research can be included in more than one publication.

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities

  1. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
  2. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
  3. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
  4. Authors must participate in the peer review process.
  5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
  6. All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
  7. Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
  8. Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
  9. Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
  10. Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.

Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities

  1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
  2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author
  3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
  4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  5. Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  6. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Section D: Editors’ responsibilities

  1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
  2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
  3. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
  4. Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
  5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
  6. Editors should have a clear picture of a research’s funding sources.
  7. Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publication’s scope.
  8. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
  9. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
  10. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
  12. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
  13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions, they should have proof of misconduct.
  14. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.

Sources:

Author Guidelines

The editorial board of ARTISTIC : International Journal of Creation and Innovation welcomes complete unpublished and original works on the following topics:

  • Creative and conceptual thinking related to the practice of art/design works and creative problems (artistic creation thought).
  • The results of artistic/design research in the fields of : keris, craft, karawitan, pedalangan (puppetry), dance, music, theater, painting, sculpture, graphics, interior design, stage design, visual communication design, product design, television, film, photography, animation, games, visual effects and other.
  • New insights about the practice of art/design, resulting from the creative
  • New knowledge generated from the practice of art/design and artwork
  • Novelty produced in the creation of art/design works, or studies of innovation in art/design.

Every manuscript submitted for publication in ARTISTIC will be checked

for plagiarism using Turnitin software. If the editors or peer reviewers detect plagiarism, the author/s will be informed and requested to rewrite the text or provide any necessary citations. The manuscript will not be eligible for review and publication if the Turnitin report results is more than 20% of the similarity index.

If you have any questions, please contact the editorial assistant at: artistic@isi-ska.ac.id.

ARTISTIC Author Guidelines:

Authors must strictly follow the submission guidelines of the journal. To submissions that do not adhere to the guidelines provided, they will be REJECTED. Please submit your article through the online submission of this journal by registering and account and login to the system.

Article Structure in General:

All articles must be written in English and should have an abstract between 100 to 150 words in length, followed by three to five keywords related to your article. Submissions should be between 4000-8000 (including abstract, table(s), figure(s) and references) in A4 size paper with margins as the following: top 3.05”, bottom 4.32”, right 2.49” and left 2.79”.

Title: the title should summarize the main idea or ideas of your paper; the title should be within 12 words maximum.

Author detail: include names of authors and their affiliation. Email is required for the corresponding author only. ARTISTIC requires that authorship be based on the following four criteria:

  1. Substantial contributions to the idea or method of the artistic research; or the collection, creation, analysis, or interpretation of data for the artistic research; AND
  2. Drafting the paper or revising it for important intellectual content; AND
  3. Final approval of the version to be submitted and published; AND
  4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the article (and artistic research) in ensuring that questions or problems related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Contributors who do not meet all 4 criteria for authorship above should be listed in acknowledgment, not as authors. Therefore, contributors doing acquisition of funding; general supervision of a research group or general administrative support; and writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, and proofreading do not qualify for authorship. To prevent misconduct in authorship, ARTISTIC only allows a maximum of five authors for one

article. Each author’s contribution to the article must be stated in the cover letter to be uploaded as a supplementary file into the OJS during article submission. We require that all co-authors be added to the metadata in the third step of article submission. Otherwise, they will not be included in the article when it is published.

Abstract: The abstract must be between 100-150 words in length. The abstract must provide a clear, brief and informative summary covering the scope and objectives, methods, significant results and / or new findings, main conclusions and recommendations. This should describe the contents of the manuscript which can be understood without the need to read the full text.

Keywords: Keywords must be between 3-5 words in length. The words should capture the essence of your paper. Include the most relevant keywords that will help other authors find your paper. These words must be presented in alphabetical order and separated by semicolon.

Introduction: state your work’s objectives and provide an adequate background, avoiding a detailed literature survey or a summary of the results. Explicitly state the literature gap, which signifies your research’s significance.

When paraphrasing a source that is not your own, be sure to represent the author’s information or opinions accurately and in your own words. Even when paraphrasing an author’s work, you still must provide a citation to that work. When directly quoting an author’s work, provide citation marks at the beginning till the end of the citation. The page number must be noted beside the author’s name and year of publication.

Literature Review: include the current knowledge or artworks, substantive findings, and theoretical and methodological contributions to your topic. A literature review surveys books, scholarly articles, artworks or design, and any other sources relevant to a particular issue, area of artistic research, or theory and, by so doing, provides a description, summary, and critical evaluation of these works in relation to the research problem being investigated. State the novelty or position of your work among their works.

Method: provide sufficient detail to allow your work to be reproduced. This includes type of research, paradigm or perspective, objects, participants, location (if necessary), instrument(s), the technique of data collection, and the technique of creation or data analysis. A reference should indicate methods already published; only relevant modifications should be described.

Results: present the results of your art/design work. Use figures and graphs if appropriate, describe and summarize your art work in the text.

Discussion: highlight the most significant results, but do not repeat what has been written in the Results section. The purpose of the discussion is to interpret and describe the significance of your art/design work in light of what was already known about the artistic research problem being investigated and to explain any new understanding or insights that emerged as a result of your study of the problem. A combined Results and Discussion section is often appropriate.

Conclusion: provide the final words on the value of your analysis, artistic research, or article. Limitations of your study should be addressed. Recommendations for future research related to your topic should also be mentioned.

Acknowledgments (optional): give credit to funding bodies and departments that have been of help during the project, for instance, by supporting it financially.

References: follow the APA 7 style. Reference writing is recommended using applications such as Mendeley. The reference writing system is used both for quotations in the text and bibliography.

All names/references mentioned in the text/article should be listed in the References section. Names not mentioned in the text/article should be removed from the References section.

Appendices (optional): if there is more than one appendix, they should be identified as Appendix A, Appendix B, etc. Formulae and equations in appendices should be given separate numbering: Eq. (A.1), Eq. (A.2), etc.; in a subsequent appendix, Eq. (B.1), and so on. Similarly, for tables and figures: Table A.1; Fig. A.1, etc.

Further guidelines are provided below

Headings and subheadings should be presented as follows (provide a space between the headings and sub-headings):

1  Introduction

  • Subheading of the Content

 

  • Subheading of the content

Indent the first line of every paragraph by 1 cm.

For Tables, the title size is 12 and the content size is 10. Number the tables subsequently throughout your article and the title is written above the table (see previous published issues for example).

For Figures, the title size is 12 and the content size (if any) is 10. Number the figures subsequently throughout your article and the title is written below the figure (see previous published issues for example).

References:

The reference list should be arranged alphabetically following the guidelines of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). For example:

  • author (Dharsono, 2020)
  • authors (Subandi & Guntur, 2021)
  • authors (Hastanto et , 2019)

Short quotations (less than 40 words):

Pryshchenko (2021, p. 51) said that “through their visual appearance, posters can be a medium for communicating cultural heritage and intercultural interactions”.

Long quotations (more than 40 words):

From the acoustic standpoint, even the sounds of words used by a speaker are one of the forms of his or her identity. Accordingly, Haryoguritno (2006) explained that:

Guwaya keris blade is an impression that can imply the spirit of a struggle that is applied to the bilah keris (blade). For example, people who are in good health and happy will look guwaya (the spirit of the hero's struggle, a body that looks firm with the characteristics of Javanese women's clothing). Guwaya is an effect that has psychological and spiritual nuances (Haryoguritno, 2006, p.23).

Reference Manager

Before copyediting after article acceptance, the Editors will hyperlink the references with corresponding in-text citations. All references and in-text citations should be in the APA 7th edition and present inside the article’s main body. References that are not cited should be removed.

Template

For consistency and convenience, please use the TEMPLATE (Article & Title Page) we already prepared on website for Author(s).

Article Selection and Publication Process

  • Upon receipt of article submission, the journal's system sends an email of confirmation to the corresponding author. If you fail to receive this confirmation, your submission/email may be missed. The author should pay no submission charge at this stage.
  • Peer review: We use a double-blind system for peer review; both reviewers’ and authors’ identities remain The article will be peer-reviewed by two reviewers. The review process may take 1-2 months.
  • Notification of the result of review is by e-
  • The authors revise the paper according to the feedback and suggestions by reviewers. Upon acceptance, a publication fee is to be paid by the author to the The publication fee is accessible at https://jurnal.isi-ska.ac.id/index.php/artistic/fee.
  • After publication, the corresponding author will receive an email of notification on the e- journal in PDF that is available on the journal’s webpage, and free of charge for
  • It normally takes about 3 – 6 months from submission to publication, with an average of 5

Copyright Notice

Authors agree to transfer the copyright of the article to journal upon publication. The journal then holds the copyright for the published version of the article.

All published articles are made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License {CC BY 4.0}, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction, and adaptation in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

This open license ensures that the content remains freely accessible and reusable in accordance with the principles of open access.

Author Fees

This journal charges the following author fees.

Article Submission: 0.00 {IDR}

Article Publication: 0.00 {IDR}

Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

All manuscripts must be free from plagiarism contents. All authors are suggested to use plagiarism detection software to do the similarity checking. Editors check the plagiarism detection of articles in this journal by using a Turnitin software.

Policy on the use of GenAI

This policy outlines the journal's stance on the ethical and responsible use of Artificial Intelligence {AI} and AI-assisted technologies in the preparation of manuscripts submitted for publication. This policy aims to ensure transparency, accountability, and the integrity of the scientific record.

1. Authorship and Accountability

  • AI cannot be an Author: AI tools and AI-assisted technologies {e.g., Large Language Models, Generative AI} do not meet the criteria for authorship as they cannot take responsibility for the content, integrity, or originality of the work. Therefore, AI tools or software cannot be listed as authors on any submitted manuscript.
  • Authors' Full Responsibility: Authors remain fully responsible and accountable for the entire content of their submitted manuscript, including any parts generated, edited, or enhanced by AI tools. This includes the accuracy, integrity, originality, and ethical soundness of the work. Authors must verify the factual correctness of any statements, citations, data, or figures generated by AI.
  • Human Oversight Required: The use of AI tools must be under direct human supervision. Authors must critically evaluate, edit, and revise any material generated by AI to ensure it aligns with scientific standards, accuracy, and ethical guidelines.

2. Transparency and Disclosure

  • Mandatory Disclosure: Authors are required to disclose the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in the preparation of their manuscript. This disclosure must be explicit, specific, and transparent.

  • What to Disclose: The disclosure should include:

    • The name of the AI tool{s} used: e.g., ChatGPT {OpenAI}, Bard {Google}, Grammarly, GPT-4, Midjourney, etc.
    • The specific purpose{s} for which the AI tool was used: e.g., language refinement, grammar check, drafting of specific sections {specify which sections}, brainstorming, data analysis assistance, image generation, etc.
    • The extent of AI involvement: A brief description of how the AI tool contributed to the manuscript.

  • Where to Disclose: This disclosure should typically be included in one of the following sections:

    • Acknowledgements section: {Preferred for general writing assistance}
    • Methods section: {If AI was used for specific methodological steps, e.g., data analysis or coding assistance}
    • A dedicated "Declaration of AI Use" statement just before the References section or in a footnote on the title page.

    Example Disclosure Statement: "Portions of this manuscript were drafted/edited/enhanced using [Name of AI tool, e.g., ChatGPT-4 {OpenAI}]. The authors used this tool for [specific purpose, e.g., improving grammar and clarity/drafting an initial version of the Introduction section]. All content generated by the AI was thoroughly reviewed, edited, and validated by the authors, who take full responsibility for the final content." Or for image generation: "Figure X was generated with the assistance of [Name of AI tool, e.g., Midjourney v5]. The authors provided the prompts and edited the output to ensure accuracy and relevance."

3. Permissible Uses {with Disclosure}

AI tools may be used to assist authors in the following ways, provided full disclosure is made:

  • Language and Grammar Refinement: Improving readability, spelling, grammar, and sentence structure.
  • Drafting Support: Assisting in the generation of initial drafts of specific, non-research-critical sections {e.g., parts of the Introduction or Discussion for stylistic purposes}, which must then be thoroughly reviewed and revised by the authors.
  • Brainstorming and Idea Generation: Assisting in conceptualizing ideas or outlining the structure of the manuscript.
  • Data Analysis and Visualization Assistance: {Only if verified and reproducible by human authors}. If AI is used in data processing, analysis, or generating figures/tables, the specific methods, tools, and validation steps must be clearly described in the Methods section.
  • Summarization of Literature: Aiding in summarizing existing literature, but the authors must ensure the accuracy of the summary and proper citation of original sources.

4. Prohibited Uses

The use of AI and AI-assisted technologies is strictly prohibited for:

  • Generating Fictitious Content: Creating false data, fabricated research results, or non-existent references/citations.
  • Plagiarism: Using AI-generated content without proper attribution {i.e., treating it as original work when it is not fully human-generated or verified}. All AI-generated content must be treated as any other source and properly attributed if it relies on existing intellectual property or specific datasets.
  • Substituting for Human Intellectual Contribution: AI cannot perform the core intellectual work of research, such as formulating original hypotheses, designing experiments, interpreting novel findings, or drawing original conclusions.
  • Violating Confidentiality: Reviewers and editors are strictly prohibited from using AI tools with confidential manuscript content {e.g., uploading the manuscript to publicly available AI models}, as this may breach confidentiality, copyright, and the integrity of the peer-review process.
  • Misrepresenting Research: Using AI to intentionally mislead readers about the methods, results, or conclusions of the research.

5. Consequences of Misuse

Failure to adhere to this policy regarding the ethical use of AI and AI-assisted technologies will be considered a serious breach of publication ethics. Such breaches may result in:

  • Rejection of the submitted manuscript.
  • Retraction of the published article.
  • Banning of the author{s} from future submissions to the journal.
  • Notification to the authors' institution and relevant ethics committees.

This policy will be periodically reviewed and updated to reflect advancements in AI technology and evolving ethical guidelines in scholarly publishing.