Generative AI and Automated Tools — Editorial Policy
Global Journal of Education, Finance and Management (GJEFM) has adopted the following comprehensive policy regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI), large-language models (LLMs), and other automated tools in the editorial and publishing process. This policy applies to authors submitting manuscripts, peer reviewers evaluating manuscripts, editors making editorial decisions, and the publisher (EP Journals Group) operating the journal's editorial infrastructure.
The policy is aligned with the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) best-practice guidance on AI tools (2024), the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) position on Authorship and AI Tools, the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) recommendations on chatbots and AI, and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations.
Identifiers: e-ISSN 3117-6771 (electronic), 3117-6763 (print).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Scope of this policy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This policy covers all uses of generative AI and automated tools in the production and evaluation of scholarly content for GJEFM, including but not limited to:
— Large-language models such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Llama, and similar systems
— Image-generation systems such as DALL-E, Midjourney, Stable Diffusion
— AI-assisted writing tools such as Grammarly's generative features, Quillbot's paraphrasing
— AI-assisted research tools such as literature-search assistants, summarisation tools
— Code-generation tools such as GitHub Copilot, Codeium
— Statistical or analytical tools that incorporate machine-learning components
— Translation tools that use neural machine translation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Policy for authors
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
2.1 Disclosure requirement
Authors must disclose any use of generative AI tools in the preparation of the manuscript, beyond straightforward language correction, editing, and formatting. The disclosure must specify:
— The tool(s) used (with name and version where applicable)
— The sections of the manuscript where the tool was used
— The purpose of the use (e.g., literature search, drafting, summarisation, code generation, translation)
— Any post-editing or verification performed by the author
The disclosure should appear in the Methods section (for research-active uses) or in a separate "AI use statement" placed before the References section. A typical disclosure might read:
"The authors used ChatGPT (GPT-4) to assist with literature search
and initial drafting of the introduction. The authors verified all
citations against original sources and revised all generated text
before inclusion. The authors take full responsibility for the
content of the manuscript."
2.2 Permitted uses for authors
The following uses of AI tools are permitted, subject to disclosure:
— Language editing and grammatical correction (does not require disclosure for minor edits)
— Translation between languages, with author verification
— Literature search assistance, with author verification of all results
— Summarisation of large bodies of literature, with author verification
— Brainstorming and outline generation
— Code generation, with author testing and verification
— Statistical or analytical computation, with author verification of results
2.3 Prohibited uses for authors
The following uses of AI tools are prohibited:
— Using AI to fabricate data, results, figures, or experimental procedures
— Using AI-generated text without author review and verification
— Citing AI-generated references without verifying they refer to real, accessible publications
— Using AI to evade plagiarism detection
— Using AI to generate fake author identities or false institutional affiliations
— Using AI to manipulate images in ways that misrepresent the underlying data
2.4 Authorship and AI
Generative AI tools cannot be credited as authors of manuscripts published in GJEFM. Authorship requires:
— Substantial contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the work
— Drafting or critically revising the work
— Final approval of the version to be published
— Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work
Automated tools cannot satisfy any of these criteria, and in particular cannot bear accountability. AI tools used should be acknowledged in the disclosure section, not in the authorship list.
2.5 AI as a citation source
Generative AI cannot be cited as a primary source in academic references. Citations in GJEFM articles must be to verified, peer-reviewed sources, books, datasets, or other verifiable scholarly works. Where an AI tool has been used in the research process, the tool itself may be acknowledged in the methods or disclosure section, but should not appear in the references.
2.6 Fabricated citations
Large-language models are known to fabricate plausible-looking but non-existent references. Authors are responsible for verifying every reference cited in their manuscript against the actual source. Submission of a manuscript containing fabricated citations constitutes research misconduct under the journal's Research Integrity policy and may result in:
— Manuscript rejection
— Notification to the author's institution
— Inclusion on the journal's restricted-submission list (where misconduct is intentional or repeated)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Policy for peer reviewers
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
3.1 Prohibited uses by reviewers
Peer reviewers must not use generative AI to:
— Generate review reports
— Make substantive editorial recommendations
— Assess the originality, methodology, or significance of submitted work
Reviews must reflect the reviewer's own scholarly judgement informed by their reading of the manuscript.
3.2 Permitted uses by reviewers
The following uses of AI tools by peer reviewers are permitted, subject to confidentiality protections:
— Language editing of the reviewer's own draft review (with disclosure to the editor if substantive)
— Verification of citation existence (where the reviewer suspects fabrication)
— Background reading on technical topics outside the reviewer's primary expertise (using publicly available AI tools, not the manuscript itself)
3.3 Confidentiality
Reviewers must not upload submitted manuscripts, in whole or in part, to public AI tools (such as the public ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini interfaces). Doing so would constitute a breach of confidentiality, as the manuscript content may be retained by the AI service provider, used for model training, or otherwise exposed to third parties.
If a reviewer believes that AI assistance is essential to a particular review (for example, a highly technical manuscript requiring specialised analysis), the reviewer should consult with the handling editor before proceeding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Policy for editors
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
4.1 Prohibited uses by editors
Editors must not use generative AI to:
— Draft editorial decision letters
— Make substantive editorial decisions
— Generate substantive correspondence with authors
Editorial decisions must reflect the editor's own scholarly judgement, informed by reviewer reports and the editor's reading of the manuscript.
4.2 Permitted uses by editors
The following uses are permitted:
— Language editing of editorial correspondence (where the editor's first language is not English)
— Routine administrative tasks (scheduling, formatting templates, generating standard forms)
— Identifying potential reviewers using AI-assisted suggestions, subject to editor verification of suitability and conflict of interest
4.3 Confidentiality
Editors must not upload manuscripts to public AI tools, for the same confidentiality reasons that apply to reviewers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Use of automated tools by the publisher
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
EP Journals Group uses automated tools in routine editorial operations. The following uses are disclosed for transparency:
5.1 Plagiarism and text-similarity detection. The publisher uses similarity-detection software (such as Turnitin or iThenticate) to check submitted manuscripts against published literature. Outputs are reviewed by human editors before any action is taken.
5.2 Image manipulation detection. Where suspicious images are flagged, automated tools may be used to detect duplication, splicing, or alteration. Outputs are reviewed by human editors.
5.3 Citation verification. Automated tools may be used to check that cited references exist and are correctly formatted.
5.4 Language and grammar checking. Automated tools may be used to flag potential language issues for the copyediting team's attention.
5.5 Reference formatting. Automated tools convert references to the journal's required style.
In all cases, automated outputs are reviewed by human editors before any decision affecting authors, reviewers, or content is made. Automated tools do not make autonomous decisions on acceptance, rejection, or correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Privacy and data protection
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The publisher's use of automated tools is governed by data protection requirements. Manuscripts are handled in accordance with the journal's Privacy Policy. Where automated tools require external service connections, those connections are reviewed for compliance with data protection law.
The publisher does not share manuscript content with AI training datasets. Manuscript content is not used to train large-language models or other generative systems by the publisher.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Reporting AI policy violations
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Suspected violations of this AI policy by authors, reviewers, editors, or the publisher should be reported in confidence to:
editor@ep-journals.org
Reports should include as much specific information as possible: the manuscript title or ID, the suspected violation, evidence supporting the report, and the reporter's contact information (which will be kept confidential to the extent possible).
Reports are investigated under the journal's Research Integrity and Publication Ethics procedures.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Sanctions for AI policy violations
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Substantiated violations of this policy may result in:
— Manuscript rejection (during peer review)
— Article retraction with reason explicitly cited (after publication)
— Notification to the author's institution and funder
— Inclusion on the journal's restricted-submission list (for serious or repeated violations)
— Notification to the indexing services where GJEFM is indexed
Sanctions are proportionate to the severity of the violation and apply equally to authors, reviewers, and editors.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
9. Disclosure templates
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Authors required to disclose AI use may find the following templates useful:
Template 1 — minimal AI use:
"The authors used [TOOL NAME] (version [X]) for language editing
during manuscript preparation. The authors verified all generated
text and take full responsibility for the content of the
manuscript."
Template 2 — research-active AI use:
"The authors used [TOOL NAME] (version [X]) to [SPECIFIC TASK,
e.g., 'summarise the literature on topic X' / 'generate initial
drafts of the discussion section' / 'translate the manuscript from
Spanish to English']. All output was verified by the authors against
original sources and revised before inclusion. The authors take
full responsibility for the content of the manuscript."
Template 3 — AI in research methods:
"Generative AI was a component of the research methodology.
Specifically, [DESCRIBE METHODOLOGY]. The system version was [X],
the prompts used are reproduced in the supplementary materials,
and the outputs were [verified / coded / analysed] by [METHOD]."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Policy review schedule
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This AI policy is reviewed every 6 months given the rapid evolution of generative AI technology and associated guidance. Material updates are announced through the journal's announcements page and reflected in the version history at the foot of this document.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
11. References to external standards
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This policy aligns with:
— Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) Guide to Applying, Best Practices section, AI subsection
— Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Position Statement: Authorship and AI Tools (2023)
— World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) Recommendations on Chatbots and Generative AI (2024)
— International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations, AI section
— STM Association Generative AI Paper (2023)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Contact information
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Publisher: EP Journals Group
Publisher website: https://www.ep-journals.org
Editorial contact: editor@ep-journals.org
Journal: Global Journal of Education, Finance and Management (GJEFM)
Identifiers: e-ISSN 3117-6771, p-ISSN 3117-6763
Last reviewed: 2026
Policy version: 1.0
