AI Policy
Jurnal Al-Mu'tabar recognizes that the rapid development of Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly Generative AI, has created valuable opportunities to support academic activities and scholarly publishing. Technologies such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and other AI-based tools can assist with language editing, translation, idea organization, and various aspects of academic writing and publication.
Jurnal Al-Mu'tabar permits the responsible and limited use of AI as long as its use upholds the principles of academic integrity, transparency, confidentiality, and scholarly responsibility. AI should be regarded as a supporting tool, not as a substitute for human intellectual judgment, critical thinking, expertise, or accountability.
To safeguard the quality, credibility, and integrity of the publication process, this AI Use Policy applies to Authors, Editors, and Reviewers as follows.
1. Authors
Authors may use AI as a supporting tool during the preparation of their manuscripts, particularly to improve the quality, clarity, and readability of their writing. AI may be used, for example, to assist with grammar and spelling, sentence structure, language translation, writing style, and the initial organization of ideas.
However, AI must never replace the intellectual contribution or scholarly responsibility of the Author. Authors remain fully responsible for every aspect of their manuscripts, including the research data, methodology, analysis, results, discussion, conclusions, references, and overall academic integrity.
Authors must not use AI to fabricate or manipulate research data, falsify research findings, generate false references or citations, distort research results, or conceal plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct. Any information, references, quotations, or other content generated or assisted by AI must be carefully checked and independently verified against reliable and authoritative sources.
AI systems, chatbots, or other AI tools must not be listed as Authors or Co-Authors, as they cannot assume academic, ethical, or legal responsibility for the content of a published article.
Where the use of Generative AI makes a substantive contribution to the preparation of a manuscript, Authors are required to disclose such use transparently to Jurnal Al-Mu'tabar. The disclosure should, at a minimum, identify the AI tool used and explain the purpose for which it was used.
For example:
AI Use Disclosure: During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of AI tool] to assist with [language editing/translation/structuring of the manuscript/other specific purpose]. All AI-assisted content was carefully reviewed, edited, and verified by the authors. The authors take full responsibility for the content, accuracy, originality, and integrity of the manuscript.
The guiding principle for Authors is therefore clear: AI may assist the writing process, but the Author remains the person who thinks, verifies, decides, and takes full responsibility for the final manuscript.
2. Editors
Editors play a fundamental role in maintaining the quality, objectivity, fairness, and integrity of the publication process at Jurnal Al-Mu'tabar. In carrying out their editorial responsibilities, Editors may use AI in a limited manner to support administrative and editorial tasks, such as improving the language of editorial correspondence, organizing information, or identifying relevant keywords and general topics.
Nevertheless, AI must never replace editorial judgment or decision-making. Decisions concerning manuscript acceptance, rejection, revision, reviewer selection, ethical concerns, or any other substantive editorial matter must be made by the Editor based on scholarly judgment, peer-review outcomes, journal policies, and applicable publication-ethics principles.
Editors also have a fundamental responsibility to protect the confidentiality of manuscripts and all information obtained throughout the editorial process. Accordingly, Editors must not upload or disclose unpublished manuscripts, research data, Author information, Reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, or other confidential materials to public AI tools or third-party AI platforms that have not been authorized by the journal and do not provide adequate confidentiality and data protection.
When using AI, Editors should also remain alert to the possibility of bias, inaccurate information, fabricated content, or misleading AI-generated outputs. AI-generated information must be critically evaluated and verified before it is used in any editorial context.
Jurnal Al-Mu'tabar may also use AI-detection tools as one of several supporting instruments in the editorial process. However, an AI-detection score must never be regarded as conclusive evidence that a manuscript has been generated by AI. Such results may contain errors or false positives and must therefore be considered alongside other relevant evidence and through appropriate editorial judgment.
The guiding principle for Editors is therefore: AI may support editorial work, but final decisions must remain with qualified human Editors who are accountable for the academic and ethical integrity of the publication process.
3. Reviewers
Reviewers may use AI in a limited manner to improve the clarity and presentation of their peer-review reports. For example, AI may assist with grammar, sentence clarity, or the organization of review notes that have already been developed through the Reviewer's own reading and scholarly assessment.
However, AI must never replace the independent academic judgment of the Reviewer. Reviewers are expected to read, understand, analyze, and critically evaluate the manuscript themselves, based on their expertise and competence in the relevant field.
Reviewers must not upload or enter manuscripts under review, research data, tables, figures, research findings, Author identities, or any other confidential information into public AI tools or AI systems that have not been specifically authorized by Jurnal Al-Mu'tabar.
Reviewers must also not ask AI to conduct the entire peer-review process and then submit the AI-generated output as their own review report. Recommendations concerning whether a manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected must be based on the Reviewer's own scholarly assessment, expertise, and critical judgment.
Any information, analysis, or suggestions obtained through AI must be carefully evaluated and independently verified. Reviewers remain fully responsible for all comments, criticisms, recommendations, and assessments submitted to the Editor.
Confidentiality is an essential responsibility of every Reviewer. Manuscripts received for peer review are confidential documents and must not be disclosed, distributed, used for personal purposes, or entered into AI systems that may store, process, or reuse their contents without appropriate authorization.
The guiding principle for Reviewers is therefore: AI may help improve how a Reviewer communicates an assessment, but it must never replace the essential human processes of reading, critical thinking, scholarly evaluation, and academic judgment.
