Statement on AI and authorship

Use of generative AI tools in writing your submission

Análise Social recognises the value of generative AI (e.g. ChatGPT or other Large Language Models, LLMs) as productivity tools that can help authors in preparing their article for submission; to generate initial ideas for a structure, for example, or when summarizing, paraphrasing, language polishing etc. However, it is important to note that all these models have limitations and are unable to replicate human creative and critical thinking. Human intervention with these tools is essential to ensure that content presented is accurate and appropriate to the reader. Análise Social therefore requires authors to be aware of the limitations of generative AI and to consider the following:

  • Nonbias: Previously published content that contains racist, sexist or other biases can be present in AI-generated text, and minority viewpoints may not be represented. Use of AI has the potential to perpetuate these biases because the information is decontextualized and harder to detect.
  • Accuracy: AI can ‘hallucinate’ i.e. generate false content, especially when used outside of their domain or when dealing with complex or ambiguous topics. They can generate content that is linguistically but not scientifically plausible, they can get facts wrong, and they have been shown to generate citations that don’t exist. Some versions are only trained on content published before a particular date and therefore present an incomplete picture.
  • Contextual understanding: generative AI cannot apply human understanding to the context of a piece of text, especially when dealing with idiomatic expressions, sarcasm, humour, or metaphorical language. This can lead to errors or misinterpretations in the generated content.
  • Training data: AI requires a large amount of high-quality training data to achieve optimal performance. However, in some domains or languages, such data may not be readily available, limiting the usefulness of the model.

 

Guidance for authors

Authors are required to:

  1. Clearly indicate the use of generative AI models in the manuscript,including which model was used and for what purpose. Please use the methods or acknowledgements section, as appropriate. Do not list ChatGPT or similar LLMs as authors.
  2. Verify the accuracy, validity, and appropriateness of the contentand any citations generated by generative models and correct any errors or inconsistencies.
  3. Provide a list of sources used to generate contentand citations, including those generated by generative AI. Double-check citations to ensure they are accurate, and are properly referenced.
  4. Be conscious of the potential for plagiarism where these models may have reproduced substantial text from other sources. Check the original sources to be sure you are not plagiarising someone else’s work.
  5. Acknowledge the limitations of generative AI models in the manuscript,including the potential for bias, errors, and gaps in knowledge.

We will take appropriate corrective action where we identify published articles with undisclosed use of such tools.

Guidance for editors and reviewers

Editors and reviewers should evaluate the appropriateness of the use of generative AI and ensure that the generated content is accurate and valid.

Editors and Reviewers must uphold the confidentiality of the peer review process. Editors must not share information about submitted manuscripts or peer review reports with generative AI, such as ChatGPT.

Reviewers must not use artificial intelligence tools to generate review reports, including but not limited to ChatGPT.

Further information

Please see the  Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)’s position statement on Authorship and AI tools.

This policy may evolve further as we work with our publishing partners to understand how emerging technologies can help or hinder the process of preparing research for publication. Please check back to this page for the latest information.