Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

International Journal of Business, Law, and Education (IJBLE)

Journal: International Journal of Business, Law, and Education (IJBLE)
e-ISSN: 2747-139X
Publisher: IJBLE Scientific Publications Community Inc.
Official Website: https://ijble.com/index.php/journal

1. Policy Statement

The International Journal of Business, Law, and Education (IJBLE) recognizes the increasing contribution of Artificial Intelligence (AI), generative AI, Large Language Models (LLMs), and AI-assisted technologies to academic research, scholarly writing, data analysis, and scientific publishing.

IJBLE supports the responsible, transparent, ethical, and academically rigorous application of AI technologies where such applications improve research efficiency, scholarly communication, methodological quality, and accessibility without compromising academic integrity.

The journal maintains that AI-assisted technologies must supplement rather than replace human intellectual contributions, independent scientific judgment, critical reasoning, and ethical accountability.

This policy establishes requirements governing the use of AI by authors, peer reviewers, editors, and other individuals participating in the scholarly publication process.

Its principles are informed by internationally recognized recommendations from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

2. Scope and Applicability

This policy applies to all manuscripts submitted to IJBLE, including original research articles, theoretical papers, literature reviews, systematic reviews, comparative studies, legal analyses, educational research, and interdisciplinary investigations.

It covers AI-assisted activities undertaken during:

1. Research conceptualization and literature exploration.

2. Research design and methodological development.

3. Data collection, processing, and analysis.

4. Manuscript drafting, editing, and translation.

5. Reference identification and management.

6. Development of tables, figures, and visual materials.

7. Initial editorial screening.

8. Peer-review assistance.

9. Editorial decision support.

10. Manuscript production and post-publication processes.

All participants must comply with applicable confidentiality, intellectual property, research ethics, and data protection requirements.

3. Fundamental Principles for Responsible AI Use

IJBLE adopts six fundamental principles:

3.1 Human Accountability

Human researchers, reviewers, and editors retain full responsibility for their work and professional judgments, including AI-assisted contributions.

3.2 Transparency and Disclosure

Substantive use of AI must be accurately disclosed, including the technology employed, its purpose, and its contribution to the research or publication process.

3.3 Scientific Integrity

AI-generated outputs must be critically evaluated for accuracy, validity, reproducibility, originality, relevance, and potential bias.

3.4 Confidentiality and Data Protection

Unpublished manuscripts, personal information, confidential research materials, and editorial communications must be protected against unauthorized disclosure or processing.

3.5 Human Intellectual Independence

AI must not replace original scholarly reasoning, independent methodological assessment, or expert evaluation.

3.6 Fairness and Non-Discrimination

AI-assisted evaluation must not disadvantage authors based on language proficiency, geographical location, institutional affiliation, disciplinary approach, or other irrelevant characteristics.

4. Permitted Use of AI by Authors

IJBLE permits responsible AI assistance when its use is transparent, academically justified, and subject to meaningful human supervision.

Acceptable applications may include:

4.1 Academic Language Enhancement

AI may assist with grammar correction, sentence restructuring, translation, readability, and academic English refinement, provided that the authors verify the final language and preserve the intended scientific meaning.

4.2 Literature Exploration

AI may assist researchers in identifying relevant research themes, conceptual relationships, terminology, and potential literature sources.

All suggested references must be independently verified against authentic scholarly publications.

4.3 Research Planning and Methodological Support

AI may support research design, statistical programming, analytical procedures, qualitative coding frameworks, and methodological clarification.

Researchers remain responsible for ensuring that the selected methods are appropriate and correctly implemented.

4.4 Data Analysis and Interpretation

AI-based analytical tools may be employed where their use is methodologically justified and sufficiently documented to permit evaluation and, where feasible, replication.

4.5 Academic Visualization

AI may assist in preparing conceptual diagrams, graphical illustrations, and research visualizations, provided that the resulting materials accurately represent the underlying information and comply with intellectual property requirements.

4.6 Research Productivity

AI may support technical tasks such as document formatting, reference organization, computational coding, and manuscript structure.

Permission to use AI does not constitute permission to delegate scientific responsibility to an automated system.

5. Prohibited and Unacceptable AI Practices

IJBLE strictly prohibits the misuse of AI technologies in any manner that compromises research integrity or scholarly authenticity.

Prohibited practices include:

1. Fabricating, manipulating, or falsifying research data, interview transcripts, survey responses, experimental observations, or research findings.

2. Generating fictitious citations, non-existent publications, false DOI identifiers, or misleading bibliographical information.

3. Inventing judicial decisions, statutory provisions, legal authorities, educational assessments, or policy documents.

4. Presenting AI-generated statements, simulated observations, or synthetic responses as authentic empirical evidence.

5. Creating misleading images, figures, recordings, or other materials that misrepresent the research process or its findings.

6. Using AI to conceal plagiarism, duplicate publication, unauthorized paraphrasing, or copyright infringement.

7. Submitting AI-generated manuscripts without adequate original intellectual contributions from accountable human authors.

8. Fabricating reviewer identities, peer-review reports, editorial correspondence, or publication decisions.

9. Uploading confidential research or manuscript materials into unauthorized AI services.

10. Misrepresenting the extent of AI involvement or deliberately concealing substantive AI use.

IJBLE does not automatically prohibit research merely because AI was used. Ethical evaluation considers the nature of the use, the accuracy of its disclosure, the research context, and the reliability of the scholarly work.

6. AI Authorship and Human Responsibility

Artificial Intelligence systems, language models, chatbots, and other automated tools cannot qualify as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to IJBLE.

Authorship requires intellectual responsibility, accountability, approval of the final manuscript, and the capacity to address questions concerning the accuracy and integrity of the published research.

AI technologies cannot fulfill these responsibilities.

Accordingly:

• AI tools must not be included in the author list.

• AI-generated content must be critically reviewed and validated by human authors.

• All listed authors must approve the final manuscript.

• Human authors remain accountable for research integrity, originality, accuracy, citations, and ethical compliance.

• AI use does not reduce or replace the authorship requirements established by IJBLE.

This provision is consistent with the journal's Authorship Criteria and Author Contributions Policy.

7. Mandatory AI Use Disclosure

Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies during manuscript preparation or research.

Disclosures must identify the AI tool, its developer or provider, the purpose of its use, and the nature of its contribution.

When relevant, authors should additionally identify the tool version, date of use, and important methodological settings.

AI-assisted writing or language editing should be declared in an appropriate acknowledgment or dedicated declaration section.

AI used in research design, data generation, analytical procedures, coding, statistical analysis, or figure production must also be described in the Methods section or another appropriate part of the manuscript.

Authors must provide corresponding disclosure information during OJS submission.

Recommended statement when AI was used:

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Research and Writing Process

"The authors declare that artificial intelligence-assisted technologies were used during the preparation of this manuscript. Specifically, [tool name and provider] was employed for [describe the purpose and extent of use]. All AI-assisted outputs were independently reviewed, verified, and revised by the authors. The authors assume full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, scientific integrity, and final content of this publication."

Recommended statement when AI was not used:

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

"The authors declare that no generative artificial intelligence or AI-assisted technologies were used in the substantive development, analysis, interpretation, or preparation of this manuscript."

Conventional tools performing routine functions without generative or substantive intellectual input, such as basic spelling checks and reference formatting, do not ordinarily require a separate AI declaration.

8. AI-Assisted Research Methodology and Reproducibility

Where AI materially contributes to research methodology, authors must provide sufficient information to permit editorial assessment and reasonable reproducibility.

Relevant disclosures may include:

• Name and provider of the AI tool.

• Model or software version, where available.

• Purpose and scope of AI involvement.

• Data inputs and preprocessing procedures.

• Analytical prompts, parameters, or computational settings where methodologically relevant.

• Validation procedures and human oversight.

• Known limitations and potential sources of bias.

• Procedures for protecting research data and personal information.

Authors must distinguish original empirical evidence from AI-generated, simulated, or synthetic materials.

The generation of synthetic data may be acceptable within an appropriately designed and clearly disclosed methodological framework, but such data must never be represented as independently collected observations.

9. Accuracy of Citations, Legal Authorities, and Academic Sources

AI-generated citations and scholarly claims must not be accepted without independent verification.

Authors must verify that:

1. Every cited publication exists and is accurately represented.

2. Author names, publication years, article titles, journal information, and DOI identifiers are correct.

3. Cited sources substantively support the corresponding claims.

4. Quotations accurately reproduce their original sources.

5. Legislative materials and judicial decisions are authentic and properly identified.

6. Statistical statements and reported findings are supported by verifiable evidence.

For legal scholarship, references to statutes, regulations, judicial decisions, and legal doctrines must be verified using reliable primary legal sources wherever available.

For business and economic research, AI-assisted interpretations must be supported by valid financial, organizational, economic, or empirical evidence.

For educational research, AI-assisted analysis must not misrepresent student performance, learning outcomes, participant responses, or educational assessment results.

AI-generated answers must not substitute for verifiable primary sources.

10. AI-Generated Figures, Images, and Research Materials

AI-assisted figures, diagrams, and visual materials may be considered when their use is academically justified and appropriately disclosed.

Authors must ensure that AI-generated materials:

• Do not alter or misrepresent empirical research findings.

• Do not fabricate evidence or falsely depict research participants.

• Comply with relevant copyright, licensing, and attribution requirements.

• Clearly distinguish illustrative or synthetic content from authentic research documentation.

• Can be independently evaluated where necessary.

IJBLE may request original data, source images, analysis scripts, or supporting documentation to verify the integrity of submitted materials.

11. Use of AI by Peer Reviewers

IJBLE recognizes that AI technologies may provide limited assistance with technical or linguistic aspects of scholarly evaluation.

However, independent expert assessment remains the fundamental responsibility of the appointed human reviewer.

Reviewers must not upload manuscripts, supplementary materials, unpublished research data, or confidential editorial communications to external AI systems unless the journal has explicitly authorized such processing and appropriate confidentiality safeguards are established.

Any proposed AI-assisted review activity must comply with the journal's requirements and receive editorial authorization where applicable.

Reviewers must disclose permitted AI use to the handling editor.

AI must not:

• Replace the reviewer's independent critical analysis.

• Generate a complete peer-review assessment that is submitted without substantive human evaluation.

• Determine the publication recommendation autonomously.

• Access confidential manuscripts through unauthorized services.

• Invent methodological weaknesses, research findings, or bibliographic evidence.

Reviewers must personally verify their comments and retain full responsibility for the content, fairness, accuracy, and scholarly justification of their recommendations.

12. AI-Assisted Initial Editorial Screening

IJBLE may employ authorized AI-assisted tools to support preliminary manuscript screening, editorial quality assurance, and research integrity assessment.

AI-assisted screening may support the identification of issues involving:

1. Alignment with the journal's aims and scope.

2. Manuscript structure and required sections.

3. Research objectives and claimed contributions.

4. Methodological reporting and internal consistency.

5. Academic language and clarity.

6. Reference completeness and potential bibliographical inconsistencies.

7. Possible similarities, citation anomalies, or other research integrity concerns.

8. Completeness of ethics declarations and supporting documentation.

9. Potential reporting deficiencies requiring editorial clarification.

Such analysis is preliminary and advisory.

Any AI-generated screening output must be clearly identified as an AI-Assisted Editorial Screening Report, rather than an independent human peer-review report.

AI-generated findings require verification by an authorized editor before they can be relied upon.

The existence of an AI screening report does not establish that a manuscript has undergone external peer review.

Where manuscripts pass initial screening, they remain subject to IJBLE's established peer-review process involving qualified human reviewers.

13. AI Editorial Review Assistant

Where deployed and formally authorized by the journal, an AI Editorial Review Assistant may function as a decision-support system within the editorial workflow.

The assistant may generate structured preliminary observations concerning manuscript presentation, scientific reporting, methodological clarity, argument consistency, and possible ethical concerns.

Its operation must follow these requirements:

13.1 Advisory Status

All outputs are recommendations for editorial consideration and do not constitute peer-review decisions.

13.2 Evidence-Based Assessment

The assistant must identify the manuscript material actually examined and distinguish observed deficiencies from potential concerns requiring further investigation.

13.3 Clear Review Scope

If only the title or abstract is analyzed, the report must explicitly state that the full manuscript has not been evaluated.

13.4 Transparent Identification

Reports must indicate that they were generated with AI assistance and identify relevant tool information when available.

13.5 Human Verification

Editors must review significant findings before communicating concerns or initiating actions based on those findings.

13.6 Protection of Manuscript Data

Processing must comply with applicable confidentiality, information security, and data protection obligations.

13.7 No Autonomous Editorial Decisions

The assistant must not independently accept, reject, or request revisions to a manuscript.

13.8 Editorial Traceability

Where AI screening is used, the journal should maintain appropriate records of the screening activity, its limitations, and the editor's subsequent assessment.

The use of an AI Editorial Review Assistant must not be presented as equivalent to independent peer review.

14. Editorial Independence and Final Decision-Making

The Editor-in-Chief and authorized handling editors retain responsibility for editorial decisions.

AI-generated recommendations may inform editorial judgment but must not independently determine whether a manuscript is accepted, rejected, revised, or referred for additional evaluation.

Editorial decisions must consider the manuscript's originality, scientific contribution, research design, methodological rigor, reliability of evidence, ethical compliance, and evaluations provided by qualified human reviewers.

Consistent with IJBLE's Peer Review Process Policy, reviewer recommendations are advisory, and final decisions remain the responsibility of the authorized editorial decision-maker.

An automated numerical assessment, risk classification, or AI-generated recommendation cannot replace this process.

15. AI Detection Tools and Fair Editorial Assessment

IJBLE recognizes the limitations of automated AI-content detection, text similarity analysis, and research integrity screening technologies.

AI detectors may produce false positive or false negative results and cannot conclusively establish whether particular content was generated by AI.

Accordingly:

• AI-detection scores must not serve as the sole basis for manuscript rejection or allegations of misconduct.

• Similarity percentages must be interpreted in context rather than treated as automatic proof of plagiarism.

• Editors must assess relevant evidence independently.

• Authors must be given an appropriate opportunity to explain or respond to credible concerns.

• Editorial investigations must be proportionate, objective, and consistent with due process.

IJBLE's primary concern is the scientific validity, transparency, originality, and integrity of research rather than the presence of AI-assisted language alone.

16. Confidentiality, Privacy, and Data Security

Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff must safeguard confidential information throughout the publication process.

Confidential manuscripts and unpublished research materials must not be submitted to AI platforms that lack appropriate security, confidentiality, contractual, or data processing safeguards.

Editors and reviewers must obtain the necessary authorization before using external AI services where manuscript confidentiality cannot be assured.

Where IJBLE authorizes AI-assisted editorial processing, the journal must ensure appropriate arrangements concerning:

1. Access authorization and authentication.

2. Data processing and confidentiality.

3. Protection of unpublished intellectual property.

4. Restrictions on unauthorized model training or secondary data use.

5. Storage, retention, and deletion of manuscript materials.

6. Security of editorial communications.

7. Compliance with applicable privacy and data protection laws.

Research data containing personal, sensitive, confidential, or legally protected information must not be processed through unauthorized AI platforms.

17. AI Use in Copyediting and Production

AI-assisted technologies may be used in production-related activities, including language editing, formatting, metadata quality checks, and accessibility improvements, when authorized by the journal.

Any such use must preserve the scholarly meaning of the accepted manuscript and remain subject to appropriate editorial verification.

Substantive changes to scientific findings, interpretations, conclusions, or legally significant statements must not be introduced without appropriate author review and editorial authorization.

The journal should inform authors of any material AI-assisted production processing and maintain appropriate quality assurance procedures.

18. Non-Compliance and Publication Ethics

Suspected violations of this AI Policy will be assessed in accordance with IJBLE's publication ethics requirements and applicable COPE guidance.

Potential violations may include undisclosed substantive AI use, fabricated research evidence, fictitious citations, manipulated illustrations, unauthorized disclosure of confidential information, or deceptive AI-generated peer-review material.

Depending on the available evidence, severity of the concern, and stage of publication, IJBLE may:

1. Request an explanation or additional documentation.

2. Require corrected AI disclosures.

3. Request research data, methodological records, or supporting evidence.

4. Require manuscript revision or additional scholarly verification.

5. Suspend editorial consideration while significant concerns are investigated.

6. Reject a manuscript where serious ethical violations are substantiated.

7. Publish corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions where justified.

8. Refer serious concerns to relevant institutions or authorities when appropriate.

Corrective actions must be based on a fair assessment of evidence rather than unverified AI-detection results.

Authors should be provided with a reasonable opportunity to respond to substantive allegations.

19. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal if they believe that an AI-related editorial assessment or resulting decision involved a significant factual, procedural, or ethical error.

Appeals should identify the manuscript, describe the disputed issue, and provide relevant supporting evidence.

Where practicable, appeals will be assessed by an editor not directly involved in the original decision.

The journal will evaluate appeals in accordance with its established editorial and publication ethics procedures.

20. Policy Implementation and Review

This AI Policy establishes IJBLE's requirements for responsible AI use in scholarly research and publication.

The editorial board is responsible for overseeing its implementation, communicating relevant requirements to authors and reviewers, and ensuring consistency with other journal policies.

The policy should be reviewed periodically to reflect developments in AI technologies, scholarly publishing standards, research integrity guidance, and applicable regulatory requirements.

Changes to this policy should be communicated through the journal's official website.

21. Ethical Guidelines and References

This policy is informed by the following internationally recognized resources:

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
Authorship and AI Tools
https://doi.org/10.24318/cCVRZBms

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals — Use of Artificial Intelligence in Publishing
https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/artificial-intelligence/

World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
Recommendations on Chatbots and Generative Artificial Intelligence in Relation to Scholarly Publications
https://www.wame.org/page3.php?id=106

International Journal of Business, Law, and Education (IJBLE)
Authorship Criteria and Author Contributions Policy
https://ijble.com/index.php/journal/Criteria

International Journal of Business, Law, and Education (IJBLE)
Peer Review Process Policy
https://ijble.com/index.php/journal/Process-policy

International Journal of Business, Law, and Education (IJBLE)
Commitment to Ethical Artificial Intelligence, Human Accountability, Academic Integrity, and Responsible Scholarly Publishing.

Publisher: IJBLE Scientific Publications Community Inc.
e-ISSN: 2747-139X
Website: https://ijble.com/index.php/journal
Editorial Contact: manager.ijble@ijble.com | adm.ijble@gmail.com