Generative AI for Editors

Generative AI for Editors

A summary of editors’ responsibilities when using generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and AI-assisted technologies during the editorial process.

Important: This page summarizes editors’ responsibilities at Jurnal Meta-Yuridis. It should be read together with the full Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies Policy of Jurnal Meta-Yuridis. If there is any inconsistency, the full policy prevails. [link to the full policy]

1. Confidentiality

  • Editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and all materials associated with the editorial process.

  • Editors must not upload or transfer a manuscript, or any confidential part of it, to an external GenAI system unless that system has been specifically approved by Jurnal Meta-Yuridis under appropriate confidentiality, privacy, security, and data-governance safeguards.

2. Editorial Assessment and Decisions

Editors remain responsible for editorial assessment and decision-making. AI must not independently determine or replace human judgment in matters such as:

  • accepting, rejecting, or requesting revisions to a manuscript;

  • assessing research-integrity concerns or suspected publication misconduct; and

  • making other significant editorial decisions.

Final editorial decisions must remain the responsibility of a qualified human editor.

3. Editorial Communications

Editors remain responsible for the accuracy, appropriateness, confidentiality, and tone of all editorial correspondence, including correspondence prepared with AI assistance.

4. AI-Assisted Editorial Screening

Jurnal Meta-Yuridis may use AI-assisted tools to support similarity checks, language screening, reference and metadata checks, image screening, reviewer identification, and technical-compliance checks.

AI-generated scores, flags, or recommendations must not automatically determine an editorial decision. A qualified human editor must assess any potential concern before taking significant action.

5. AI Detection

AI-detection tools may be used as one source of information when a concern arises. An AI-detection score alone is not conclusive evidence that a manuscript was generated by AI or that misconduct occurred. Editors must consider the evidence as a whole and may ask the authors for clarification.

6. Reviewing GenAI Declarations

  • During manuscript processing, review the authors’ GenAI declaration where necessary.

  • Before a manuscript is accepted, confirm that the declaration is present and completed accurately, whether it states that AI was not used or that AI was used.

  • At publication, ensure that the declaration appears in the article, usually immediately before the References section, and that any use of AI in the research methodology is described in the Method section.

7. Handling Suspected Misconduct

Suspected misconduct, including an undisclosed or false declaration of AI use, fabricated references, AI-manipulated images, or misuse of confidential material, must be handled in accordance with Jurnal Meta-Yuridis’ publication ethics and research-integrity procedures.