In brief

01Introduction

AI tools may assist authors in improving language clarity, organizing ideas, formatting references, translating text, supporting data analysis, and enhancing technical aspects of manuscript preparation.

However, the use of AI must be carefully governed to protect the integrity of scholarly work. The journal emphasizes that AI tools must not replace human intellectual responsibility, critical analysis, methodological rigor, ethical judgment, or scholarly originality.

This policy applies to the use of AI tools by authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff throughout the processes of manuscript preparation, submission, peer review, editorial handling, revision, publication, and post-publication assessment.

This policy is grounded in internationally recognized publication ethics principles, particularly those concerning authorship accountability, transparency, confidentiality, originality, privacy, intellectual property, and responsible editorial decision-making.

02Definition of AI Tools

For the purposes of this policy, AI tools refer to digital systems, platforms, applications, or software that use artificial intelligence techniques, including machine learning, natural language processing, deep learning, or large language models, to generate, analyze, translate, summarize, classify, edit, visualize, or modify scholarly content.

Examples of AI tools include, but are not limited to:

1. generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot, and other large language models;
2. AI-assisted writing, grammar, paraphrasing, and translation tools such as Grammarly, DeepL Write, QuillBot, and similar platforms;
3. AI-supported tools for literature discovery, reference management, coding, data cleaning, statistical analysis, visualization, or modeling;
4. AI-assisted tools used to generate, modify, interpret, or enhance textual, numerical, visual, audio, or multimodal data.

03Acceptable Use of AI Tools by Authors

Authors may use AI tools only when they retain full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and scholarly validity of the manuscript. The use of AI tools must be transparent where required and must not compromise the ethical standards of academic publishing.

3.1 Permissible uses without disclosure

Disclosure is not required when AI tools are used only for basic language and technical assistance that does not alter the scholarly meaning, argument, analysis, or interpretation of the manuscript. Examples include:

1. grammar, spelling, and punctuation checking;
2. minor improvements to language fluency and readability;
3. formatting references according to the journal’s citation style;
4. minor editing of sentence structure without changing the meaning, claims, findings, or interpretations.

3.2 Permissible uses requiring disclosure

Disclosure is required when AI tools are used beyond basic proofreading or formatting. This includes, but is not limited to:

1. substantive rewriting, restructuring, summarizing, or reorganizing manuscript sections;
2. translation support that goes beyond minor language polishing;
3. assistance in coding, data cleaning, statistical analysis, qualitative data analysis, or data visualization;
4. literature mapping, idea generation, keyword generation, or conceptual framing;
5. support in developing research instruments, rubrics, prompts, analytical categories, or thematic codes;
6. any AI-assisted process that materially influences the manuscript’s argument, analysis, interpretation, or presentation.

In all such cases, authors must independently verify the accuracy, validity, and reproducibility of AI-assisted outputs.

04Restricted and Prohibited Uses

Authors must not use AI tools to:

1. generate an entire manuscript or substantial portions of scholarly content in place of the authors’ own intellectual work;
2. fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or distort data, findings, quotations, images, tables, results, or interpretations;
3. generate citations, references, or bibliographic information without verifying that each source exists and is accurately represented;
4. summarize, paraphrase, or rewrite published works in ways that constitute plagiarism or obscure the original source;
5. create false claims of novelty, originality, methodological rigor, or empirical evidence;
6. produce content that infringes copyright, privacy, confidentiality, intellectual property, or third-party rights;
7. replace the authors’ own critical thinking, theoretical interpretation, pedagogical judgment, methodological reasoning, or educational analysis.

05Use of AI in Images, Figures, Tables, and Artwork

JPPM does not permit the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create, alter, manipulate, or fabricate images, figures, visual data, or research evidence in submitted manuscripts. This includes the use of AI tools to:

1. enhance, obscure, remove, move, or introduce specific features in an image;
2. generate artificial visual data presented as research evidence;
3. alter classroom images, participant documentation, screenshots, observational evidence, or visual research materials in ways that affect interpretation;
4. produce graphical abstracts or visual artwork without proper permission and attribution.

Basic adjustments such as brightness, contrast, or color balance may be acceptable only if they do not obscure, remove, or misrepresent information present in the original image.

Exception for methods-based AI use

If AI-assisted image generation, image recognition, automated classification, multimodal analysis, or visual interpretation is part of the research method, authors must describe it clearly and reproducibly in the Methods section. The description must include:

1. the name of the AI tool or model;
2. the version, developer, or provider where available;
3. the purpose and procedure of use;
4. the type of input and output generated;
5. the verification process conducted by the authors.

The journal may request raw data, original images, screenshots, logs, prompts, or additional documentation for editorial and ethical assessment.

06AI Writing Detection and Editorial Screening

• JPPM may use AI-writing detection tools, similarity-checking software, and other screening systems to support editorial assessment. However, the journal will not rely solely on automated tools to determine whether a manuscript complies with this policy.
• All AI-related concerns will be assessed through editorial review, contextual evaluation, and, where necessary, direct communication with the authors.
• The journal may request clarification, revision, disclosure, supporting materials, or methodological explanation if inappropriate or undisclosed AI use is suspected.

07Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are fully responsible for all content submitted to JPPM, including any content generated, revised, translated, analyzed, or formatted with the assistance of AI tools. Authors must:

1. verify the accuracy, originality, and reliability of all AI-assisted content;
2. check all references and citations to ensure that they are real, relevant, and accurately represented;
3. ensure that the manuscript is free from plagiarism, factual errors, bias, hallucinated information, or fabricated evidence;
4. ensure that all external sources, data, quotations, images, instruments, and identifiable materials are properly cited and ethically used;
5. retain intellectual ownership of the manuscript’s argument, analysis, interpretation, and conclusions;
6. be able to explain how AI tools were used when disclosure is required;
7. accept full responsibility for any ethical breach, error, omission, or misrepresentation resulting from AI-assisted work.