GUIDELINES ON THE USE OF GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (GENAI) TOOLS
Implementing Annex to Section 5 of the Anti-Plagiarism Policy of the journal “Podstawy Edukacji”
- Purpose and general provisions
This document provides further detail and expands upon the provisions contained in Section 5 (‘Use of AI tools’) of the Anti-Plagiarism Policy of the journal “Podstawy Edukacji”.
These rules define the technical limits on the use of artificial intelligence (AI), supporting the main objective set out in the policy of ensuring high-quality publications, protecting intellectual property and ensuring transparency in the publishing process.
The regulations apply to all participants in the process: Authors, Reviewers and Editors.
- Authorhood and Status of the Author
In accordance with Section 5, point 3 of the Anti-Plagiarism Policy, AI tools are not and must not be listed as authors or co-authors of a work.
In accordance with Section 3 and Section 5(1) of the Anti-Plagiarism Policy, full and personal responsibility for the content, originality and legality of the materials used lies solely with the author (in the case of teams – with the authors jointly and severally). AI tools do not have the capacity to approve the final version of the text or to take responsibility for any ethical breaches.
- Guidelines for Authors
A. Permitted forms of support (auxiliary in nature)
In accordance with the general policy, the use of AI tools is permitted solely in an auxiliary capacity. This includes:
- language editing – correction of grammar, style and punctuation, as well as improvements to the structure and readability of the text,
- translation – support in translating the original text into the target language, provided that the content is fully verified and the scientific terminology is approved by the author.
B. Prohibited forms of use (Ethical violations)
To clarify the prohibitions set out in Section 5 of the Anti-Plagiarism Policy, the following are considered strictly unacceptable:
- the generation of substantive text (including introductions, literature reviews, discussions and conclusions) using AI without substantive review by the author,
- creating fictitious sources, quotations or generating false bibliographical references,
- using AI to generate, fabricate or manipulate research data and results (which, in accordance with Section 2 of the Anti-Plagiarism Policy, constitutes gross data falsification),
- the use of AI generators to create or modify images, figures, charts, maps or graphical abstracts, if this could distort, remove or conceal actual information contained in the source material (see Section 3 of the anti-plagiarism policy).
C. Research and Methodological Exception
The only exception to the prohibition on the generation of content/data by AI is where the GenAI tools, algorithms or interactions with them constitute the direct subject and aim of the author’s research project.
In such cases, the methodological use of AI must be described in detail in the methodology section of the article. The editorial board reserves the right to request source data in accordance with Section 7 of the anti-plagiarism policy.
- Guidelines for Reviewers and Editors
To elaborate on Section 10 of the Anti-Plagiarism Policy (‘The role of editors and reviewers’), both editors and reviewers are strictly prohibited from entering submitted manuscripts, excerpts thereof, reviews, or confidential correspondence into public GenAI tools (including LLM models).
Submitting an author’s text to external AI systems constitutes a gross breach of the duty of confidentiality and the protection of the author’s intellectual property rights and personal data (see Section 10, points 2 and 3 of the Anti-Plagiarism Policy).
AI tools must not replace independent substantive assessment, critical thinking or editorial/peer-review decisions.
- Obligation of transparency and disclosure procedure
In accordance with Section 5 of the Anti-Plagiarism Policy, any significant use of AI must be disclosed to the Editorial Board.
There is no obligation to declare the use of standard, built-in automated tools (e.g. spell-check in word processors).
Where AI is used for advanced editing or translation, authors are required to include a statement in a footnote to the article title or in the ‘Declarations’ section at the end of the text.
Sample statement:
“In the process of preparing [specify the element, e.g. text translation / advanced language editing], the tool [Tool Name, version/model] was used for the purpose of [specify the purpose]. The author(s) have verified the results obtained and, in accordance with the journal’s Anti-Plagiarism Policy, bear full, personal responsibility for the final content and accuracy of the publication.”
- Verification, COPE procedures and sanctions
In accordance with Section 6 of the main policy, manuscripts are analysed using the Crossref Similarity Check (iThenticate) system. The Editorial Board reserves the right to use additional, certified algorithms for detecting AI-generated content.
In the event of suspected undisclosed or unauthorised use of AI, the Editorial Board initiates detailed procedures in accordance with COPE guidelines (Section 7) and suspends the publication process until the matter has been clarified by the Managing Editor and Editor-in-Chief. The author may be asked to provide the document’s revision history or raw source data.
Confirmation of undisclosed or unauthorised use of AI is treated as a breach of publication ethics and results in the sanctions described in Sections 8 and 9 of the anti-plagiarism policy.
The author has the right to appeal against the Editorial Board’s decision within 14 days, in accordance with the provisions of Section 11 of the Anti-Plagiarism Policy.