Generative AI Policies

  1. Introduction

Global Perspectives in Management (GPIM) recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies are increasingly being used in academic research, scholarly writing, data analysis, and scientific communication. These technologies may support researchers in improving language, organizing ideas, exploring research questions, and assisting with certain technical tasks.

However, the use of AI must not compromise academic integrity, research originality, data reliability, confidentiality, or the accountability of authors, reviewers, and editors. GPIM is committed to ensuring that AI technologies are used responsibly, transparently, and ethically throughout the scholarly publishing process.

This policy establishes the principles and requirements governing the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation, peer review, editorial assessment, and publication.

  1. General Principles

The use of generative AI in connection with submissions to GPIM must adhere to the following principles:

  • Human accountability: Authors, reviewers, and editors remain responsible for their work and decisions, regardless of whether AI tools have been used.
  • Transparency: Material use of AI must be disclosed where required by this policy.
  • Accuracy and verification: AI-generated content must be carefully reviewed and verified before it is used in scholarly work.
  • Originality and integrity: AI must not be used to fabricate research findings, misrepresent contributions, or conceal plagiarism or other misconduct.
  • Confidentiality: Unpublished manuscripts, personal information, and confidential editorial materials must be protected from unauthorized disclosure to AI systems.
  • Responsible use: AI tools must support, rather than replace, independent scholarly judgment, critical thinking, and ethical research practices.
  1. Policy for Authors

Authors submitting manuscripts to GPIM are responsible for ensuring that their work is original, accurate, ethically prepared, and compliant with the journal's submission requirements.

Authors may use appropriate AI-assisted tools for limited purposes, such as language improvement, grammar correction, formatting assistance, or support with organizing material, provided that such use does not compromise the integrity of the research.

Where AI tools have materially contributed to manuscript content, analysis, interpretation, or the generation of substantive material, authors must disclose that use in accordance with this policy.

Authors must ensure that:

  1. All factual claims, references, citations, calculations, and interpretations generated or assisted by AI are independently checked for accuracy.
  2. AI-generated references correspond to genuine publications and accurately represent the cited sources.
  3. Research data, results, tables, figures, and conclusions are not fabricated, falsified, or misrepresented through the use of AI.
  4. The manuscript represents the authors' genuine scholarly contribution and does not contain plagiarized or misleading content.
  5. Any use of AI that materially contributed to the research or manuscript is disclosed appropriately.
  6. The use of AI does not violate confidentiality, copyright, data protection, or other applicable legal and ethical obligations.

Authors remain fully accountable for the entire manuscript, including content generated or modified using AI tools.

  1. Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI tools when such tools have materially contributed to the writing, development, analysis, interpretation, or creation of substantive manuscript content.

The disclosure should identify the AI tool used, explain its purpose, and describe the nature of its contribution. Authors should also identify the relevant sections or activities where appropriate.

The disclosure may be included in a separate section titled "Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Manuscript Preparation", placed before the References section.

Authors may use the following declaration as a template:

When AI has been used:

"During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of AI tool] for [specific purpose]. The authors subsequently reviewed and verified the generated material and take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and final content of the published work."

When AI has not been used:

"The authors declare that no generative AI tools were used to produce substantive manuscript content or to conduct the reported research."

Authors must adapt the declaration to reflect their actual use of AI tools. A declaration must not be used to imply that AI-generated information has been verified unless such verification has taken place.

Routine spelling correction or basic grammar assistance may be treated differently from substantive AI-generated content, depending on the nature of the use. Authors should follow any additional disclosure instructions provided by the journal.

  1. AI Tools and Authorship

Generative AI tools, chatbots, and other AI systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to GPIM.

Authorship requires human accountability, the ability to approve the final manuscript, and responsibility for addressing questions concerning the accuracy and integrity of the research. AI systems cannot fulfil these responsibilities.

Authors must ensure that all individuals listed as authors meet the journal's authorship requirements and have made genuine scholarly contributions.

AI tools must not be used to misrepresent authorship, generate fictitious contributors, or conceal the identity or contribution of individuals involved in preparing a manuscript.

Responsibility for all AI-assisted material rests with the human authors.

  1. Prohibited and Unacceptable Uses of AI

The following uses of AI are prohibited or may constitute research or publication misconduct:

  • Fabricating or falsifying research data, experimental results, survey responses, statistical findings, or other evidence.
  • Generating fictitious references, citations, sources, quotations, or research findings.
  • Presenting AI-generated material as independently verified research when it has not been checked.
  • Using AI to plagiarize, paraphrase copied material to conceal its origin, or evade plagiarism-detection procedures.
  • Manipulating images, tables, figures, or research evidence in ways that misrepresent the underlying information.
  • Misrepresenting the methodology, analysis, findings, or conclusions of a study.
  • Using AI to impersonate authors, reviewers, editors, or other individuals involved in the publishing process.
  • Disclosing confidential, personal, or sensitive information to AI systems without appropriate authorization and safeguards.
  • Using AI to generate fraudulent peer-review reports, fictitious reviewer identities, or misleading editorial correspondence.

Any suspected violation will be assessed in accordance with GPIM's publication ethics and research integrity procedures.

  1. Use of AI in Research Data Analysis

AI-assisted tools may be used for appropriate research activities, including coding support, statistical assistance, data organization, qualitative analysis, or computational modelling, where their use is methodologically justified.

Authors must remain responsible for the selection, application, and interpretation of such tools.

Where AI has played a substantive role in data processing, analytical procedures, modelling, or interpretation, authors should describe its use in the methodology or another appropriate section of the manuscript. The description should be sufficient for readers to understand the role of the tool and assess the reliability of the reported findings.

Authors must verify analytical outputs and ensure that conclusions are supported by the underlying data and appropriate methods.

AI-generated results must not be presented as independently validated findings without suitable verification. Where relevant, authors should acknowledge limitations, potential bias, uncertainty, and reproducibility concerns associated with the tools used.

  1. AI-Generated Images, Tables, and Figures

Authors are responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and appropriate attribution of all images, tables, figures, diagrams, and other visual materials submitted for publication.

The use of generative AI to create or substantially modify visual material must be disclosed when it materially affects the research content or presentation. Authors should identify the tool used and explain the nature of its contribution.

AI-generated visual material must not be used to fabricate experimental evidence, alter research findings, misrepresent observations, or create misleading representations of data.

Authors must ensure that the use of AI-generated material complies with applicable copyright, licensing, privacy, and ethical requirements.

Where a figure or image is intended to represent actual research observations or experimental results, AI-generated content must not be substituted for genuine evidence in a way that misleads readers.

The journal may request original files, supporting data, or further clarification if concerns arise about the authenticity or accuracy of submitted visual material.

  1. Policy for Reviewers

Reviewers play a critical role in protecting the quality, fairness, and integrity of the peer-review process. GPIM requires reviewers to exercise independent scholarly judgment and maintain strict confidentiality.

Reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, or other confidential materials to public or unauthorized AI systems.

AI tools must not replace a reviewer's independent assessment of the manuscript's originality, methodology, evidence, interpretation, and contribution to the field.

Reviewers remain responsible for the accuracy, fairness, and substance of their review reports. They must verify any AI-assisted observations and ensure that comments are based on the manuscript and relevant scholarly evidence.

Reviewers must disclose relevant conflicts of interest and comply with the journal's peer-review policy. Any suspected research misconduct or inappropriate AI use should be reported confidentially to the responsible editor.

  1. Policy for Editors and Editorial Staff

Editors and editorial staff must ensure that the use of AI does not compromise editorial independence, confidentiality, fairness, or the integrity of publication decisions.

Unpublished manuscripts and confidential editorial materials must not be entered into AI systems that are not authorized and appropriately safeguarded for such use.

AI-assisted tools may be used for appropriate administrative or editorial support where permitted, but editorial decisions must remain the responsibility of qualified human editors.

Editors must independently evaluate reviewer recommendations, consider the scholarly merits of manuscripts, and make decisions in accordance with GPIM's editorial policies.

Editors must not rely solely on AI-generated assessments to determine whether a manuscript should be accepted or rejected.

Any suspected misuse of AI, research misconduct, or breach of confidentiality must be handled in accordance with the journal's established procedures.

  1. Copyright, Privacy, and Confidentiality

Authors, reviewers, and editors must ensure that their use of AI complies with applicable copyright, privacy, confidentiality, and data protection requirements.

Material belonging to third parties must not be uploaded to AI systems or reproduced without the necessary rights, permissions, or lawful basis.

Personal data, confidential research information, unpublished results, and sensitive institutional material must be handled responsibly. Individuals must not disclose such information to AI tools without appropriate authorization and safeguards.

Users of AI-assisted technologies are responsible for understanding the relevant tool's data-handling conditions and ensuring that their use is compatible with the obligations associated with the material.

The use of AI does not remove or reduce any existing confidentiality, copyright, or ethical obligations.

  1. Editorial Screening and Assessment of AI-Related Concerns

GPIM may assess suspected inappropriate AI use as part of its broader commitment to research integrity and publication ethics.

Where concerns arise, the journal may request clarification from the authors, supporting documentation, original data, research records, or other relevant information necessary to evaluate the matter.

AI-detection tools, where used, may provide supplementary information but should not be treated as conclusive proof of misconduct on their own. Any decision should consider the available evidence, the nature of the suspected violation, and the authors' explanations.

The journal will seek to handle such concerns fairly, consistently, and confidentially.

Where a breach is established, appropriate action may include requesting revisions or additional disclosures, rejecting the manuscript, correcting the published record, or retracting an article, depending on the seriousness and circumstances of the case.

  1. Responsibilities of Authors and Other Participants

All authors are responsible for ensuring that their manuscripts comply with this policy before submission and throughout the editorial process.

Corresponding authors should ensure that all co-authors are informed of any material use of AI and agree with the relevant declarations.

Reviewers and editors must comply with the requirements concerning confidentiality, independent judgment, and responsible use of AI-assisted tools.

All parties are expected to cooperate with legitimate editorial enquiries and provide accurate information when concerns about AI use arise.

Compliance with this policy does not exempt any participant from the journal's other publication ethics, authorship, peer-review, copyright, or research integrity requirements.

  1. Policy Violations and Consequences

Suspected violations of this policy will be assessed in accordance with the circumstances of each case and the principles of fairness, proportionality, and research integrity.

Depending on the nature and severity of a confirmed violation, GPIM may take one or more of the following actions:

  • Request clarification, disclosure, or supporting documentation.
  • Require corrections or revisions to the manuscript.
  • Reject a manuscript that does not meet the journal's ethical or academic standards.
  • Suspend editorial processing while a concern is investigated.
  • Publish a correction or expression of concern for an affected article.
  • Retract a published article were justified by the evidence.
  • Refer serious concerns to an appropriate institution or organization were warranted and lawful.

No decision should be based solely on an AI-detection score without an appropriate assessment of the available evidence.

  1. Policy Review and Updates

GPIM recognizes that generative AI technologies and their applications in scholarly publishing continue to evolve. This policy may be reviewed and updated periodically to reflect developments in research integrity, editorial practice, technology, and relevant ethical guidance.

Authors, reviewers, editors, and readers are encouraged to consult the current version of the policy before submitting manuscripts or participating in the journal's editorial process.

The journal will communicate material policy changes through its official website.

  1. Contact Information

Questions regarding this policy or concerns about the use of AI in a submission or published article may be directed to the GPIM editorial office through the official contact details provided on the journal website.

All enquiries will be handled in accordance with the journal's publication ethics, confidentiality, and editorial procedures.