AI-Generated Content Policy

Synthesis: A Multidisciplinary Research Journal recognizes the increasing role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in contemporary research and scholarly publishing. To ensure transparency, maintain academic integrity, and uphold the standards of responsible authorship, the following policies govern the acceptable use of AI throughout the manuscript lifecycle.

1. Responsible Use of AI Tools by Authors

Authors may employ AI-based tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Grammarly, DeepL, QuillBot, GitHub Copilot) for limited, non-substantive support, including:

  • Language polishing or grammar refinement

  • Translation assistance or paraphrasing

  • Coding support or debugging under human supervision

However, AI tools must not be used to generate intellectual content or replace original scholarly analysis, interpretation, or argumentation.
Human authors bear full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of all submitted material.

2. AI Tools Cannot Be Listed as Authors

In accordance with ICMJE authorship criteria, AI tools, large language models (LLMs), and similar technologies (e.g., ChatGPT, Bard, Claude, Gemini) cannot meet authorship requirements, which include:

  • Accountability for the integrity and validity of the work

  • Responsibility for disclosures and conflicts of interest

  • Participation in manuscript approval and correspondence

Therefore, AI tools must not be credited as authors under any circumstances.

3. Required Disclosure of AI Use

Any use of AI tools during manuscript preparation must be transparently disclosed in an appropriate section (e.g., Acknowledgments).
An acceptable disclosure example:

“The authors used [Tool Name, Version] to assist with [grammar correction, language translation, coding assistance, etc.]. All outputs were reviewed and verified by the authors, who take full responsibility for the final content.”

Failure to disclose AI involvement or evidence of excessive AI-generated content may result in desk rejection or post-publication action, including retraction.

4. Prohibited Uses of AI

The journal strictly prohibits the following:

  • Fully AI-generated manuscripts lacking substantive human contribution

  • AI-generated data that has not been empirically verified

  • Fabricated references, incorrect citations, or “hallucinated” content produced by AI tools

  • Use of AI to generate research interpretations, conclusions, or conceptual frameworks

All data, citations, and interpretations must be critically assessed and validated by human authors.

5. Plagiarism, Originality Screening, and AI Detection

All submissions are screened using plagiarism detection systems such as iThenticate or Turnitin. These systems may also identify AI-generated patterns or improperly paraphrased text.

Manuscripts showing high levels of AI dependence, insufficient originality, or compromised research integrity may be rejected prior to peer review.

6. Use of AI by Editors and Reviewers

Editors and peer reviewers may use AI tools in limited, ethically appropriate ways, such as:

  • Grammar or spelling checks

  • Technical checks for image or data irregularities

  • Assistance in verifying citations or identifying literature gaps

AI tools must not be used to generate editorial decisions, peer review reports, or evaluative commentary.

Commitment to Transparency and Human Accountability

Synthesis upholds the principle that human intellect, creativity, and responsibility must remain central to scholarly communication. All contributors are expected to ensure transparency regarding AI use and to maintain full accountability for the integrity and credibility of their work.