Policies
Artificial Intelligence & Automated Tools Policy
Automated tools support our work. People write every assessment and make every decision.
This policy explains how artificial intelligence (AI) and other automated tools may and may not be used by authors, by reviewers and editors, and by Boston Research Journals itself. It follows the current guidance of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) on generative AI and automated tools. It applies to all seven of our journals and to every stage of the peer review process.
For Authors
- Disclose any use of generative AI in preparing your manuscript that goes beyond straightforward language correction, editing, and formatting. State the tool, its version, and how it was used, in the methods or acknowledgements section.
- You are responsible for the accuracy and validity of everything in your manuscript, including any content prepared with the help of automated tools. Check every claim, figure, and reference yourself.
- AI tools cannot be credited as authors. Authorship requires accountability that software cannot hold.
- Generative AI cannot be cited as a source. Cite the original, verifiable sources instead.
- Undeclared use of generative AI discovered during review or after publication is handled under our publication malpractice policy and may lead to rejection or retraction.
For Reviewers & Editors
- Review assessments are written by the reviewer. Generative AI must not be used to produce a review report, in whole or in part.
- Manuscripts under review are confidential. They must not be uploaded to external AI tools or services.
- Disclosed, light use of AI to polish the language of a review the reviewer has written may be acceptable. The reading, judgment, analysis, and recommendation must be the reviewer's own.
- Editors reach decisions on the basis of their own reading and the reviewers' assessments, never on the output of an automated tool.
How the Journal Uses Automated Tools
We disclose our routine use of automated tools here. Each tool is tested before it enters routine use, and each runs with a human in the loop. No automated tool produces a review assessment, and none makes an editorial decision.
Submission checks
Automated validation of file integrity, formatting, and completeness at intake. Results are confirmed by the registrar.
Similarity screening
Every submission passes text similarity screening. The assigned editor reviews the similarity report and decides what follows from it.
Reviewer matching
Software suggests potential reviewers based on subject fit. Editors verify each suggestion and make every selection and invitation themselves.
Integrity flags
Automated tools flag possible text similarity, reference errors, image duplication, and undeclared generative AI use. Editorial staff verify every flag before any action is taken.
Human Oversight
A named editor is accountable for the review of every manuscript. Automated output never reaches an author as a decision without human verification. Questions about this policy can be sent to support@bostonresearch.org.