Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools in Research and Publishing 

1. Purpose and Scope

The Journal of Management Perspectives (JMP) recognises that Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools (e.g., large language models, grammar assistants, translation tools, and reference managers) are increasingly used in research and academic writing. This policy sets out acceptable and unacceptable uses of AI in line with COPE principles of transparency, accountability, integrity, and responsible authorship, and international best practice. 

2. Authorship and Responsibility

• AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. 

• Human authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical compliance of all content in their manuscripts, including any content generated or assisted by AI. 

• The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring compliance with JMP policies and ethical standards. 

Can GenAI be used in preparing a manuscript? 

Yes – with limits and disclosure. 

Authors may use GenAI as a basic author support tool (e.g., language editing, grammar checking, formatting, translation). Any use beyond basic support must be disclosed and is subject to editorial review. GenAI must not be used to create, alter, or manipulate original research data or results (including images/figures representing data), and cannot be credited as an author. Authors remain responsible for accuracy, originality, and ethics, and must consider copyright, privacy, and confidentiality before uploading content to public GenAI platforms.  

Table: Uses of GenAI by Authors (JMP position) 

Use of GenAI by Authors	JMP Position	Disclosure Required
Language editing, grammar checking, formatting	Permitted	Not required
Translation of manuscript text (authors verify meaning)	Permitted	Recommended
Summarising text for drafting (authors verify content)	Permitted	Recommended
Assisting with references (discovery only; authors must verify sources)	Permitted	Recommended
Uses beyond basic support (e.g., drafting substantial text)	Permitted with editorial permission	Required
Creating/altering/manipulating original research data or results (incl. data-representative images/figures)	Not permitted	N/A
Presenting AI-generated content as original research outputs	Not permitted	N/A
Listing GenAI as an author	Not permitted	N/A

(Aligned with STM 2023 guidance and STM 2025 AI classification framework.) 

3. Acceptable Uses of AI

Authors may use AI tools for: 

• Language editing, grammar checking, clarity and readability; 

• Summarising text for drafting (with full author verification); 

• Formatting, referencing support, and stylistic improvements; 

• Translation (with verification of accuracy and meaning); 

• Supporting coding or data analysis tasks (where methods are transparent and reproducible). 
  All AI-assisted outputs must be critically reviewed, edited, and verified by the authors. 

4. Unacceptable Uses of AI

Not permitted: 

• Submitting AI-generated content as original scholarly work without substantial human intellectual contribution; 

• Fabricating data, results, references, quotations, or sources; 

• Using AI to generate peer-review reports or editorial decisions; 

• Manipulating images, figures, or data in a misleading way; 

• Plagiarism or close paraphrasing without proper citation. 

5. Disclosure and Transparency

Authors must disclose AI use in the manuscript (e.g., Methods or Acknowledgements/Declaration of AI Use), specifying: 

• Tool name (and version, where available); 

• Purpose of use (e.g., language editing, summarisation, coding assistance); 

• Confirmation of author verification and responsibility. 

LINK TO DECLARATION FORM 

6. Data Protection, Confidentiality, and Ethics

• Do not upload confidential, sensitive, or identifiable data (participant data, organisational data, unpublished reviewer comments) to AI tools unless data protection and consent requirements are met. 

• AI use must comply with ethical clearance conditions, institutional policies, POPIA (South Africa), and applicable data protection laws. 

 

Can editorial teams use GenAI to perform integrity checks (copyright infringement, unauthorized reuse, paraphrasing, plagiarism)? 

Public GenAI platforms must not be used for integrity checks due to confidentiality, privacy, and copyright risks. Editorial teams may use publisher-approved secure tools with appropriate IP, privacy, and security safeguards.  

Can editorial teams fully rely on GenAI outcomes? 

No. GenAI outputs are assistive only. Human oversight is mandatory for all editorial decisions and integrity checks.  

7. Peer Review and Editorial Use of AI

• Reviewers and editors may use AI only for language support or summarisation, not for evaluative judgements or decisions. 

• Manuscripts, reviewer comments, and editorial communications must not be uploaded to third-party AI systems that compromise confidentiality. 

• Editorial decisions remain the responsibility of human editors. 

Should reviewers use GenAI tools to review manuscripts? 

No. Reviews must be authored by the appointed human reviewer. Manuscripts and supplementary materials must not be uploaded to public GenAI platforms.  

What should reviewers do when they suspect undisclosed use of GenAI by authors? 

Reviewers should report concerns to the handling editor in line with IJMP policy. If undisclosed GenAI appears substantial, reviewers may note its potential impact on accuracy or suitability for publication.  

Can vendors use GenAI tools for their work? 

Vendors/third-party service providers may use GenAI only with prior IJMP/publisher approval, subject to contractual assurances on data privacy, security, confidentiality, and IP protection. Manuscripts and supplementary materials must not be uploaded to public GenAI services.  

Can readers upload published manuscripts to publicly available GenAI platforms? 

No. This may violate copyright, privacy, and confidentiality.  

8. Plagiarism, Misconduct, and Sanctions

IJMP may use plagiarism-screening and integrity tools. Undisclosed or unethical AI use may be treated as misconduct and handled in line with IJMP and COPE-aligned procedures. Sanctions may include rejection, retraction, institutional notification, or submission bans. 

9. Evolving Nature of AI Use

AI technologies evolve rapidly. This policy will be reviewed periodically and updated in line with COPE guidance, STM recommendations, and international best practice. 

References 

COPE: Committee on Publication Ethics (2025) AI use in publication. Available at: https://stm-assoc.org/document/recommendations-for-a-classification-of-ai-use-in-academic-manuscript-preparation/ (Accessed: 12 February 2026). 

STM Association (2025) Recommendations for a classification of AI use in academic manuscript preparation (STM_AI_Classification_Recs_19_Sept2025). Available at: https://stm-assoc.org/document/recommendations-for-a-classification-of-ai-use-in-academic-manuscript-preparation/ (Accessed: 12 February 2026). 

STM Association (2023) Generative AI in scholarly communications: Ethical and practical guidelines for the use of generative AI in the publication process. Available at: https://www.stm-assoc.org (Accessed: 12 February 2026).