AI Usage Policy

SEARCH: Science Education Research Journal recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies are increasingly being used in scholarly research, academic writing, data analysis, and scientific communication. These technologies may support certain aspects of scholarly work; however, their use must remain consistent with the principles of academic integrity, research ethics, transparency, confidentiality, and responsible scholarly publishing. This policy establishes the requirements governing the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies (hereafter referred to as “AI Tools”) by authors, reviewers, editors, and other individuals involved in the journal's publication process.

This policy applies to all manuscripts submitted to or processed by SEARCH: Science Education Research Journal, including original research articles, review articles, conceptual papers, and other scholarly contributions considered for publication. It applies throughout manuscript preparation, submission, peer review, editorial evaluation, revision, and publication. The journal may update this policy in response to developments in AI technology, research integrity standards, publication ethics, and applicable legal or institutional requirements.

Authors may use AI Tools to support specific aspects of manuscript preparation, provided that their use is appropriate, transparent where required, and subject to meaningful human oversight. Permitted applications may include language editing, grammar and spelling correction, translation assistance, preliminary organization of ideas, formatting support, and assistance in improving the clarity and readability of scholarly writing. AI Tools may also be used for preliminary exploration of research topics or for supporting routine writing tasks, provided that the authors independently verify all resulting content and comply with the requirements of this policy.

The use of AI Tools must not replace the authors' intellectual contribution, critical thinking, subject-matter expertise, methodological judgment, or independent interpretation of research findings. Authors must not rely on AI-generated output as an authoritative source of scientific evidence. AI-generated text, summaries, explanations, or interpretations must be critically assessed and revised by the authors before inclusion in a manuscript. The acceptability of a particular use depends on its purpose, its influence on the scholarly content, and whether it preserves the integrity and originality of the research.

Authors retain full responsibility and accountability for the entire content of their submitted manuscripts, regardless of whether AI Tools have been used. Before submission, authors must carefully review all AI-assisted content and ensure that the manuscript meets the journal's standards of accuracy, originality, methodological rigor, and ethical conduct. This responsibility includes, but is not limited to, the following requirements:

Accuracy and Verification. Authors must independently verify factual claims, scientific explanations, statistical interpretations, equations, quotations, references, citations, and other information generated or modified with AI Tools. References suggested or generated by AI must be checked against reliable original sources to confirm that they exist, are accurately represented, and genuinely support the associated claims. Authors must correct any fabricated references, inaccurate statements, misleading summaries, unsupported conclusions, or other errors before submission.

Originality and Intellectual Contribution. Authors must ensure that the manuscript represents their own scholarly contribution and does not reproduce unattributed material, infringe copyright, or misappropriate the ideas or work of others. AI-generated material must not be presented as original empirical evidence, independent scholarly reasoning, or a contribution that the authors have not actually produced or critically evaluated. The use of AI does not exempt authors from complying with the journal's plagiarism, citation, and research integrity policies.

Methodological Integrity. Authors must not use AI Tools to fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or selectively misrepresent research data, observations, results, or analytical outputs. Where AI is used as part of the research design, data collection, coding, classification, statistical analysis, modeling, or interpretation, authors must describe its role sufficiently to permit an appropriate assessment of methodological validity and, where applicable, reproducibility. AI-generated outputs must not be reported as observed data or independently verified findings when they have not been established through the stated research procedures.

Privacy, Confidentiality, and Data Protection. Authors must not upload confidential, personally identifiable, sensitive, unpublished, or otherwise restricted research data to external AI services unless such use is authorized, lawful, ethically approved where required, and consistent with applicable consent, institutional requirements, and the service's data protection terms. Authors are responsible for assessing the privacy, security, retention, and reuse implications of the AI Tools they employ.

Human Oversight. Authors must exercise substantive human judgment over all AI-assisted work. They must be able to explain, defend, and take responsibility for the research design, methodology, analysis, interpretation, and conclusions presented in their manuscripts. AI-generated content must not be incorporated without adequate review simply because it appears plausible, fluent, or technically sophisticated.

AI Tools, including generative AI systems and AI-assisted writing applications, cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of a manuscript. Authorship entails intellectual responsibility, accountability for the integrity of the work, approval of the final manuscript, and the ability to respond to questions concerning the research. These responsibilities can only be assigned to human contributors who meet the journal's authorship criteria.

Authors must not attribute scholarly opinions, interpretations, research decisions, or findings to an AI Tool as though it were an accountable contributor. Where AI Tools have made a substantive contribution to research activities, their role must be disclosed in accordance with this policy. Any acknowledgment of AI assistance must not imply that the AI Tool holds authorship or responsibility for the manuscript.

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies when these tools contribute substantively to manuscript drafting, the development or synthesis of scholarly content, research design, data processing, analysis, interpretation, or other activities that materially affect the manuscript. The disclosure must be included in a separate statement near the end of the manuscript, before the reference list, unless the journal's submission system or editorial office specifies another location. Authors must also provide any relevant information requested in the submission process.

The disclosure should identify the AI Tool or service used, its provider or version where reasonably available, the purpose and scope of its use, and the relevant stages of manuscript preparation or research in which it was involved. Authors should briefly explain how the AI-generated or AI-assisted output was reviewed, verified, and revised under human supervision. The description must be sufficiently clear to enable editors and readers to understand the role of AI in producing the scholarly work.

Routine use of conventional spelling, grammar, punctuation, or reference-formatting tools that do not generate substantive scholarly content generally does not require a separate AI-use declaration. However, if such tools generate or substantially rewrite content, or if the editorial office requests disclosure, authors must provide the relevant information. When uncertain whether a particular application or use requires disclosure, authors should disclose it or seek clarification from the editorial office.

Suggested Disclosure Statement. “During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of AI Tool and, where available, version] for [specific purpose]. The authors reviewed, verified, and revised the relevant outputs and take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and final content of the manuscript.”

If no AI Tools were used in a manner requiring disclosure under this policy, authors may include the following statement when appropriate: “The authors did not use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in the preparation of this manuscript.” Authors must ensure that any declaration accurately reflects their actual practices.

Authors must not use generative AI to create, alter, enhance, obscure, add, remove, or otherwise manipulate figures, images, photographs, or other visual materials in a manner that misrepresents the underlying evidence or could mislead readers. This restriction includes the use of AI to modify research images, experimental results, microscopy images, gels, medical or scientific images, graphical evidence, and other materials presented as authentic research outputs. Authors must not use AI-generated visual material to fabricate experimental observations, data, participants, research settings, or evidence.

An exception may apply when AI-based image generation, image processing, or other visual AI techniques constitute an explicit component of the research design or methodology. In such cases, authors must disclose and describe the AI system, its role, relevant settings or procedures, input data where ethically and legally permissible, and the processing steps necessary to assess the validity and reproducibility of the work. The use of AI must be reported transparently in the Methods section and must comply with ethical, legal, and research-specific requirements.

AI-generated illustrations or conceptual artwork that do not represent research evidence may be considered only when their use is appropriate to the manuscript, transparently disclosed, legally permissible, and consistent with the journal's editorial requirements. Authors should seek prior guidance from the editorial office when the intended use is uncertain. All visual materials remain subject to the journal's standards for accuracy, attribution, copyright, and research integrity.

AI Tools must not be treated as substitutes for authoritative scholarly sources. Authors must verify each reference against the original publication or a reliable bibliographic database and confirm that the cited source supports the claim for which it is used. Authors must not include fabricated references, nonexistent DOIs, inaccurate quotations, or citations that cannot be independently verified. AI-generated summaries of literature must be checked against the original studies to avoid misinterpretation, omission of important qualifications, or unsupported synthesis.

When AI Tools are used for data analysis, coding, statistical procedures, qualitative coding, data classification, simulation, modeling, or interpretation, authors must ensure that the methods are appropriate to the research questions and data. The manuscript must accurately describe the role of AI in the research process, including relevant tools, procedures, parameters, validation methods, and limitations where necessary. Authors remain responsible for verifying analytical outputs and must not report AI-generated results as validated findings without adequate methodological assessment.

Authors must ensure that AI-assisted procedures do not compromise participant confidentiality, informed consent, data protection, or research ethics approval. Where AI use materially affects the study's design, analysis, or conclusions, the authors should explain the limitations and potential sources of error, bias, or uncertainty associated with the technology.

Manuscripts submitted to SEARCH: Science Education Research Journal are confidential documents. Reviewers must not upload, paste, transmit, or otherwise disclose submitted manuscripts, excerpts, figures, tables, supplementary files, or confidential manuscript-related communications to publicly accessible or third-party AI Tools. This restriction protects authors' unpublished work, intellectual property, confidential research information, personal data, and the integrity of the peer-review process.

Reviewers must not assume that a tool is appropriate for confidential material merely because it is described as secure, private, or intended for professional use. Any exceptional use of AI involving manuscript material would require explicit authorization from the journal and appropriate safeguards consistent with confidentiality, privacy, and applicable data protection obligations. Without such authorization, reviewers must assess manuscripts independently without submitting confidential material to AI systems.

Reviewers must conduct their evaluations using their own scholarly expertise, critical judgment, and independent assessment. AI Tools must not be used to generate or determine the substantive evaluation of a manuscript, including judgments about originality, scientific validity, methodological rigor, significance, ethical compliance, or publication suitability. Reviewers must not rely on AI-generated recommendations as a substitute for reading and critically assessing the complete manuscript.

Reviewers remain fully accountable for the accuracy, fairness, relevance, confidentiality, and professional tone of their review reports. Review comments must be evidence-based, constructive, specific, and free from unsupported allegations or fabricated citations. Reviewers must disclose any relevant conflict of interest and notify the editor if they identify a concern that may affect their ability to provide an independent assessment.

If reviewers suspect undisclosed or inappropriate AI use, fabricated references, manipulated images, or other potential research integrity concerns, they should communicate the concern confidentially to the handling editor and provide specific, verifiable reasons where possible. Reviewers must not make definitive allegations solely on the basis of an AI-detection score or an impression that a text appears AI-generated. Any concern must be evaluated fairly by the editorial team using appropriate evidence and procedures.

Editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and all related editorial materials, including reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, decision letters, author responses, and supplementary files. Editors must not upload or disclose these materials to third-party AI Tools for summarization, evaluation, language processing, decision support, or any other purpose unless the journal has explicitly authorized the use and adequate safeguards are in place. Confidentiality must be maintained throughout the editorial workflow.

Editorial decisions must be made by qualified human editors based on the manuscript's scholarly merit, the evidence provided by peer review, the journal's scope and standards, research ethics, and relevant publication policies. AI Tools must not replace or determine editorial judgment, reviewer selection, acceptance or rejection decisions, or decisions concerning ethical investigations. Editors must independently assess the quality and relevance of reviewer comments and must not delegate their editorial responsibility to automated systems.

Editors are responsible for ensuring that editorial communications are accurate, fair, clear, and professionally appropriate. Any permitted administrative use of AI must not compromise confidentiality, introduce unsupported claims, create misleading communications, or affect the impartiality of editorial decisions. Human editors remain accountable for all decisions and communications issued in the name of the journal.

Editors who suspect a violation of this policy must assess the concern impartially, document relevant evidence, and consult the Editor-in-Chief or editorial board when appropriate. Depending on the nature and seriousness of the concern, the journal may request clarification or supporting information from the authors, reviewers, or other relevant parties. Any investigation must respect confidentiality, procedural fairness, and the presumption that allegations require appropriate evidence before conclusions are reached.

Where a violation is established, the journal may take appropriate action in accordance with its publication ethics and editorial procedures. Such action may include requesting correction or clarification, requiring manuscript revision, rejecting a submission, suspending review, or referring a serious concern to the relevant institution or authority when warranted. Any action must be proportionate to the circumstances and consistent with the journal's established policies.

The journal may examine credible concerns about inappropriate AI use as part of its research integrity procedures. However, AI-detection tools and automated indicators are not conclusive evidence of misconduct and must not be used as the sole basis for an adverse editorial decision. Such tools may produce false positives or false negatives, and their results must be interpreted cautiously in conjunction with relevant evidence, manuscript content, author explanations, and established editorial procedures.

Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to cooperate with reasonable requests for clarification regarding AI use. Failure to disclose material AI assistance, misuse of confidential information, fabrication or manipulation of research content, or other violations of this policy may be addressed under the journal's applicable editorial and publication ethics procedures. The response will depend on the nature, extent, and consequences of the violation.

All use of AI in activities associated with SEARCH: Science Education Research Journal must be consistent with the following principles: human accountability for scholarly content and editorial decisions; transparency concerning material AI assistance; verification of accuracy and reliability; protection of confidential and personal information; respect for copyright and intellectual property; preservation of research originality and methodological integrity; and fair, independent, and responsible scholarly evaluation.

The journal recognizes that AI technologies and accepted publishing practices may evolve. Accordingly, this policy will be reviewed periodically and updated when necessary. Authors, reviewers, and editors are responsible for consulting the current version of the policy and following any additional instructions issued by the journal.

Questions about the interpretation or application of this policy should be directed to the editorial team of SEARCH: Science Education Research Journal through the journal's official website: https://e-jurnal.iainsorong.ac.id/index.php/jaser/index.