Generative AI Policy

GOTAVA: Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies may support scholarly writing, research, and editorial activities when used responsibly, transparently, and with appropriate human oversight.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff. It is intended to protect authorship accountability, research integrity, transparency, confidentiality, and the reliability of the scholarly record.

1. General Principles

Generative AI tools cannot be listed or cited as authors because authorship requires human responsibility, accountability, approval of the final manuscript, and the ability to respond to questions concerning the accuracy and integrity of the work.

Human authors remain fully responsible for all submitted content, including its originality, accuracy, references, data, analyses, figures, interpretations, conclusions, and compliance with ethical and legal requirements.

AI tools must not replace the authors’ intellectual contribution, critical reasoning, scholarly judgment, or responsibility for the work.

2. Use of AI in Manuscript Preparation

Basic tools used only for spelling, grammar, punctuation, or similar routine language correction do not require a generative-AI declaration, provided that they do not generate or substantively alter scholarly content.

Substantive use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies must be disclosed. This includes the generation, rewriting, restructuring, summarization, translation, or substantial modification of manuscript content.

The disclosure must identify the AI tool or service used, explain the purpose of its use, and confirm that the authors reviewed and verified the resulting content and accept full responsibility for the manuscript.

Authors must independently verify all factual statements, quotations, citations, references, calculations, interpretations, and other outputs produced or modified with AI assistance.

3. Use of AI in Research Methods

When AI or AI-assisted technologies form part of the research design, data collection, data processing, statistical or qualitative analysis, coding, modelling, image analysis, or another substantive research procedure, their use must be described transparently in the Methods section.

The description should provide sufficient information about the tool, model or service, purpose, procedure, and relevant settings or methodological decisions to allow readers to understand and evaluate the use of AI and, where applicable, reproduce or appropriately assess the procedure.

Use of AI as a research method is distinct from the use of AI merely to assist manuscript preparation.

4. AI-Assisted Images, Figures, Data, and Code

Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI in creating or materially modifying figures, illustrations, images, analytical outputs, or computer code.

AI-generated or AI-modified material must not misrepresent observations, participants, experimental results, community activities, research conditions, or other forms of evidence.

Where an AI-assisted figure or image is permitted, its use must be disclosed appropriately and the authors remain responsible for its accuracy, provenance, permissions, and integrity.

5. Prohibited Uses

Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies must not be used to fabricate, falsify, or manipulate data, results, references, quotations, images, evidence, participant information, ethical documentation, or other research materials.

AI tools must not be used to invent references, conceal plagiarism, disguise inappropriate text recycling, manipulate findings, misrepresent authorship, generate misleading evidence, or otherwise circumvent the journal’s publication-ethics requirements.

6. AI Disclosure

Where substantive AI use occurred during manuscript preparation, authors must include an appropriate statement in the Declarations section.

A suitable disclosure may follow this form:

During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [name of tool/service] for [purpose]. The author(s) subsequently reviewed, verified, and edited the resulting content as necessary and take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and final content of the manuscript.

When AI is used as part of the research methodology, disclosure in the Declarations section does not replace the requirement to describe that use appropriately in the Methods section.

7. Editorial Screening and AI-Detection Tools

GOTAVA may use AI-detection or other screening tools as part of the initial editorial assessment or when a specific publication-integrity concern arises.

Results produced by automated AI-detection tools are treated as screening indicators and not as conclusive evidence of AI misuse, authorship misconduct, or research misconduct.

Editorial decisions will not be based solely on an AI-detection percentage. Editors will consider the location and nature of the detected material, the authors’ disclosure, scholarly accountability, accuracy of references and claims, integrity of data and analyses, and other relevant evidence.

Where substantial or unexplained AI involvement is suspected, the Editorial Team may request clarification, supporting information, revision, or other appropriate documentation before deciding whether the manuscript should proceed to external peer review.

8. Editors and Reviewers

Submitted manuscripts, supplementary materials, unpublished data, reviewer reports, and editorial correspondence are confidential.

Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential manuscript material or identifiable excerpts to publicly accessible generative AI systems or other AI services where confidentiality, data protection, and appropriate handling of submitted material cannot be assured.

AI tools must not replace independent scholarly judgment in peer review or editorial decision-making. Editors and reviewers remain personally responsible for the accuracy, integrity, fairness, confidentiality, and scholarly quality of their evaluations and decisions.

9. Non-Disclosure and Misuse

Failure to disclose substantive AI use may result in a request for clarification or correction and may constitute a publication-integrity concern when the omission materially misrepresents how the manuscript or research was produced.

Evidence of fabricated references, fabricated or manipulated data, plagiarism, falsified results, misleading images, misrepresentation of authorship, or other serious integrity concerns will be handled in accordance with the journal’s Publication Ethics and applicable editorial procedures.

10. Policy Development

Because generative AI technologies and scholarly-publishing standards continue to evolve, GOTAVA may periodically review and update this policy to maintain appropriate standards of transparency, accountability, confidentiality, and research integrity.