PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 21, 2026Accountability in Research0 citations

Artificial Intelligence (AI) guidance for authors, peer reviewers, and editors: A content analysis of journal policies

View Full Paper
DCDeborah H. CharbonneauMZMei Zhang

Key Points

  • The research aims to analyze how journal policies address the use of artificial intelligence in scholarly publishing.
  • Conducted a content analysis of journal policies from 80 scholarly journals.
  • Collected data in August 2024 from publicly available websites.
  • Analyzed data using descriptive statistics.
  • 62.5% of journals mentioned AI in their policies.
  • 96% of journals did not allow AI to be listed as an author.
  • 54% permitted authors to use AI for language improvement in manuscripts.
  • 26% prohibited the use of AI for generating images.
  • 64% did not offer any AI-related guidance for peer reviewers and editors.

Abstract

This study aims to examine how scholarly journals advise authors, peer reviewers, and journal editors about the acceptable use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the scholarly publishing process.Methods: Using a content analysis method, policies from 80 journals were collected in August 2024 from publicly available websites. Data from the journal policies related to AI authorship and allowable AI use by authors, peer reviewers, and editors were entered into a spreadsheet and analyzed using descriptive statistics.Findings: The results show that 62.5% (n = 50) of the journal policies mentioned AI. 96% of these journals did not permit AI to be listed as an author. 54% of journals allowed authors to use AI tools to improve language in their manuscript, whereas using AI to generate images was prohibited by 26% of journals. 64% of journals did not provide any AI-related guidance for peer reviewers/editors.Conclusion: This research advances the literature by detailing journal policies regarding AI authorship, the allowed use of AI for authors and peer reviewers, and disciplinary distinctions in AI treatment. The findings underscore the need for enhanced guidance directed at authors, peer reviewers, and editors regarding the ethical and appropriate application of AI tools.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Charbonneau et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69994ba9873532290d01fc40https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2026.2632083
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper