1. Policy Statement

Sentralisasi recognizes that artificial intelligence (AI), including generative AI tools, may assist authors, reviewers, and editors in certain scholarly and editorial tasks. The journal permits responsible and transparent use of AI tools, provided that such use does not compromise research integrity, originality, confidentiality, authorship accountability, or the reliability of the scholarly record. This policy is informed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Position Statement on Authorship and AI Tools and its discussion document on Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Decision Making.

 

This policy applies to authors submitting manuscripts to Sentralisasi, peer reviewers evaluating submissions, editors making editorial decisions, and editorial staff involved in manuscript processing. The journal's requirements concerning disclosure, confidentiality, human accountability, and editorial oversight are intended to support the ethical principles described in COPE's Core Practices, particularly those concerning authorship and contributorship, allegations of misconduct, peer review, data, and ethical oversight.

2. Definition and Scope of AI Tools

For the purposes of this policy, AI tools include generative AI systems, large language models, AI writing assistants, AI-powered translation and paraphrasing systems, image and code generators, and other AI-based applications used to generate, transform, analyze, or evaluate scholarly content. AI-assisted tools may also be used in editorial workflows, including manuscript screening and reviewer-related processes. COPE discusses the distinction between conventional automation and AI-based systems and examines the ethical implications of using AI in publishing decisions in its AI in Decision Making discussion document.

3. Use of AI by Authors

Authors may use AI tools for appropriate supporting tasks, such as language improvement, grammar checking, translation assistance, organization of ideas, coding support, or preliminary analysis, provided that the use is transparent where required and does not replace the authors' responsibility for the scholarly content. Authors must ensure that the submitted manuscript accurately represents their work and that all research methods, findings, interpretations, citations, and conclusions have been critically verified by the human authors. This requirement is consistent with COPE's Position Statement on Authorship and AI Tools, which addresses authorship and accountability when AI tools are used in scholarly publishing.

 

Authors must not rely on AI-generated content without appropriate verification. They remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical acceptability of the entire manuscript, including any content generated or modified with AI assistance. Authors must correct false, misleading, fabricated, or unsupported statements before submission. COPE's Core Practices require journals to address allegations of misconduct and maintain clear policies on authorship, data, and publication ethics.

 

Authors must not use AI tools to fabricate or falsify research data, results, images, references, quotations, citations, or research procedures. AI-generated references and bibliographic details must be independently checked against reliable sources before they are included in a manuscript. Any use of AI that materially affects the research design, data processing, analysis, interpretation, or presentation must be described sufficiently for readers and editors to understand the role of the tool. These requirements reflect the journal's application of COPE's principles on authorship, research integrity, data, and misconduct, as outlined in the COPE Core Practices.

4. Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools when such use materially contributes to the preparation or production of the manuscript, including the generation or substantive revision of text, the creation or modification of images, the development of code, or the analysis or interpretation of research material. Routine spelling and grammar correction may be treated differently where it does not materially generate or change the scholarly content, but authors must follow any additional disclosure instructions issued by the journal. This disclosure requirement is Sentralisasi's editorial rule designed to support transparency and accountability; it should not be interpreted as a verbatim universal disclosure threshold established by COPE.

 

Where AI use is disclosed, authors should provide the name of the tool, the purpose for which it was used, and the relevant stage of the research or manuscript preparation. Where appropriate, authors should also describe how the AI-generated or AI-assisted output was reviewed and verified. Authors must not disclose confidential, personal, sensitive, or restricted research information to an AI service unless they have the necessary authorization and have assessed the service's data-handling conditions. These requirements support responsible attribution and accountability under the COPE Position Statement on Authorship and AI Tools and the ethical considerations discussed in COPE's AI in Decision Making document.

 

Authors may use the following statement, adapting it to accurately describe their actual use of AI:

Example AI Disclosure Statement: “During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of AI tool] for [specific purpose]. The authors reviewed and verified the resulting content, accept full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the manuscript, and remain accountable for all aspects of the published work.”

 

If no AI tools were used in the preparation of the manuscript, authors may state: “The authors did not use generative AI tools in the preparation of this manuscript.” Authors must use this declaration only when it accurately reflects their actual practice.

5. AI Tools Cannot Be Listed as Authors

AI tools must not be listed as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to Sentralisasi. Authorship entails responsibility and accountability that an AI system cannot assume. Human authors must meet the journal's authorship requirements and remain accountable for the work, including any material produced with AI assistance. This rule follows the COPE Position Statement on Authorship and AI Tools.

 

Authors must not use an AI system's name, output, or contribution statement to conceal the identity or role of a human contributor. Contributions from people who do not qualify for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately, with consent where required by the journal's authorship policy. COPE recommends clear policies on authorship eligibility, contributor recognition, and the handling of authorship concerns in its Core Practices.

6. AI-Generated Images, Figures, Data, and Other Research Materials

AI-generated or AI-modified images, figures, illustrations, tables, code, and other research materials must not misrepresent research observations, experimental evidence, or original data. Authors must disclose material AI involvement in the creation or modification of such content and must ensure that its use is permitted by applicable research standards, copyright rules, and the journal's submission requirements. COPE identifies data and reproducibility, intellectual property, and ethical oversight as key areas of publication ethics in its Core Practices.

 

Authors must not present AI-generated or synthetic data as if they were collected through actual experiments, observations, surveys, interviews, or other empirical procedures when they were not. Any synthetic or AI-generated material used as part of a legitimate research method must be described accurately, including its origin, purpose, and limitations. The editor may request supporting information or clarification if the provenance or reliability of such material is uncertain, consistent with COPE's guidance on research integrity and editorial handling of suspected misconduct in the Core Practices.

7. AI Use by Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts, supplementary files, research data, and editorial correspondence as confidential. Reviewers must not upload or disclose confidential manuscript content to public or third-party AI tools unless the journal has expressly authorized the use and the confidentiality, privacy, and data-security implications have been assessed. This policy reflects the confidentiality and responsible-review considerations discussed in COPE's AI in Decision Making discussion document and the journal's obligation to manage peer review responsibly under the COPE Core Practices.

 

Reviewers must not delegate the substantive evaluation of a manuscript to an AI system in place of their own expert assessment. AI may assist with limited tasks only when permitted by the journal and when the reviewer remains responsible for the review's content, accuracy, fairness, and confidentiality. Reviewers must independently verify any AI-assisted observations and must not rely on generated references, claims, or assessments without checking them against the manuscript and appropriate sources. COPE's AI in Decision Making discussion document examines the ethical risks of AI-supported publishing decisions, including the risk of decisions being made without adequate human verification.

 

Reviewers must follow the journal's instructions concerning AI tools and disclose any permitted use when requested by the editor. If a reviewer cannot conduct a fair and confidential assessment without unauthorized AI assistance, the reviewer should discuss the matter with the editor or decline the review. COPE's guidance on reviewer responsibilities emphasizes following the journal's review instructions and considering confidentiality and other ethical obligations; see the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

8. AI Use by Editors and Editorial Staff

Editors and editorial staff must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, author information, and unpublished research. They must not enter confidential materials into public or third-party AI tools unless the journal has expressly authorized the use and appropriate confidentiality and data-protection safeguards are in place. This requirement supports COPE's principles for responsible peer review and editorial practice in its Core Practices and its discussion of confidentiality and AI-supported decisions in AI in Decision Making.

 

Editors may use authorized AI-supported tools for administrative or screening assistance only where such use is consistent with journal procedures and does not compromise confidentiality, fairness, or editorial independence. AI-generated recommendations must be evaluated critically, and editorial decisions must remain under meaningful human oversight. COPE's AI in Decision Making discussion document explains the distinction between AI providing support to human decision-makers and AI systems making decisions without human intervention.

 

Editors must not reject, accept, or make other substantive decisions about a manuscript solely on the basis of an AI-generated recommendation or automated score without appropriate human assessment. Any AI-assisted screening result must be evaluated in context and verified where necessary. This is Sentralisasi's editorial safeguard, informed by COPE's discussion of the ethical risks associated with AI-based decision-making in scholarly publishing; see COPE's AI in Decision Making document.

9. Confidentiality, Privacy, and Intellectual Property

Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff must respect confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property, and applicable data-protection requirements when using AI tools. Manuscripts, unpublished data, identifiable personal information, confidential peer-review comments, and other restricted material must not be disclosed to an AI service without proper authorization and an assessment of the service's terms and safeguards. COPE identifies intellectual property and ethical oversight as essential publication ethics areas in its Core Practices, while its AI in Decision Making document discusses ethical considerations associated with AI use in editorial workflows.

 

Users of AI tools must also consider whether their use complies with applicable copyright and licence terms. AI-generated content must not be assumed to be free from third-party rights or free from the possibility of reproducing protected material. Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submissions comply with the journal's intellectual property and publication ethics requirements, consistent with the COPE Core Practices on intellectual property.

10. Verification, Accuracy, and Research Integrity

AI tools may produce inaccurate, fabricated, biased, incomplete, or misleading outputs, including false references and unsupported statements. Authors, reviewers, and editors must independently evaluate AI-assisted outputs before relying on them. Authors must ensure that all cited works exist and support the claims for which they are cited, and that any AI-assisted analysis is appropriate for the research question and method. These requirements support COPE's principles concerning data, reproducibility, authorship, and the handling of suspected misconduct in the Core Practices.

 

AI use must not be used to conceal plagiarism, duplicate publication, manipulated peer review, fabricated evidence, or other forms of publication misconduct. If concerns arise, Sentralisasi may request clarification, supporting documentation, or relevant research materials from the authors and may take appropriate action under its publication ethics procedures. COPE states that journals should take allegations of misconduct seriously before and after publication and maintain clearly described procedures for handling them; see COPE Core Practices.

11. Non-Compliance and Editorial Action

Failure to disclose material AI use, unauthorized disclosure of confidential content, false attribution, fabrication of research materials, or other misuse of AI may result in editorial action. Depending on the circumstances, Sentralisasi may request clarification, require revision, suspend manuscript processing while concerns are investigated, reject a submission, or take appropriate post-publication action if a problem is identified after publication. Such actions will be proportionate to the evidence and the seriousness of the concern, consistent with the procedures described in the COPE Core Practices.

 

Where a concern relates to a published article, the journal will assess the available evidence and consider whether a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or another appropriate response is necessary to protect the scholarly record. COPE identifies post-publication discussion and correction mechanisms as core responsibilities of journals; see COPE Core Practices.

12. Human Responsibility and Editorial Independence

AI tools may provide assistance, but they do not replace human responsibility for scholarly research, peer review, or editorial judgment. Authors remain responsible for their manuscripts, reviewers remain responsible for their evaluations, and editors remain responsible for editorial decisions. This policy reflects COPE's position that AI tools cannot take authorship responsibility and its discussion of the ethical implications of AI-supported and automated decision-making in scholarly publishing. See the COPE Position Statement on Authorship and AI Tools and COPE's AI in Decision Making document.

13. Policy Review

Sentralisasi will review this policy when relevant developments in AI technology, scholarly publishing standards, legal requirements, or publication ethics guidance warrant revision. The journal will make the current policy publicly available and communicate material changes to authors, reviewers, editors, and other relevant stakeholders. This approach supports the transparency and responsible journal management principles described in the COPE Core Practices.