Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, including large language models (LLMs) and multimodal models, continue to advance and evolve, with applications spanning business, consumer use, and even the writing of journal articles. In light of this, Ceteris Paribus: Journal of History and Humanities (JCP) welcomes the novel opportunities that generative AI tools provide, particularly in facilitating idea generation and exploration, enabling authors to express content in a non-native language, and expediting the research and dissemination process.

To this end, JCP finds it necessary to provide its authors with clear guidance on the use of these tools, guidance that will likely need to evolve as AI development accelerates. Today, generative AI tools are already capable of producing a wide range of content, including text, image synthesis, audio, and synthetic data. Examples include ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Claude, NovelAI, Jasper AI, DALL‑E, Midjourney, among others.

It is crucial to note, however, that although generative AI possesses remarkable potential to augment authors’ creativity, the current generation of these tools also entails specific risks. We strongly encourage authors to be aware of the risks inherent in the functioning of present-day generative AI tools, including but not limited to:

• Inaccuracy and bias: Generative AI tools are statistical (not factual) in nature and, as such, can produce inaccuracies, falsehoods (commonly referred to as hallucinations), or biases that are difficult to detect, verify, and correct.
• Lack of attribution: Generative AI often fails to adhere to the global scholarly community’s standard practices for providing proper and accurate attribution of ideas, quotations, or references.
• Confidentiality and intellectual property risks: At present, generative AI tools are frequently deployed on third-party platforms that may not offer adequate standards of confidentiality, data security, or copyright protection.
• Unintended use: Providers of generative AI may reuse input or output data from user interactions (for instance, for AI training). This practice has the potential to infringe the rights of authors, publishers, and other parties.

Authors therefore bear full responsibility for the originality, validity, and integrity of the content of the manuscripts they submit. When using generative AI tools, journal authors are expected to do so responsibly. This includes carefully reviewing the output generated by such tools and verifying their accuracy, fostering confidence in their work and the publication process.

Overall, JCP supports the responsible use of generative AI tools that uphold standards of data security, confidentiality, and copyright protection in cases such as:

• Idea generation and exploration
• Language enhancement
• Interactive online searching using LLM-enhanced search engines
• Literature classification
• Coding assistance

JCP makes the following explicit statements:

Authors are responsible for ensuring that the content of their submitted manuscripts meets the requisite standards of rigorous academic and scientific assessment, research, and validation, and that it is their own original work. Generative AI tools must not be credited as authors, as these tools are incapable of assuming responsibility for the submitted content or handling copyright and licensing agreements. Non-compliance with these policies may result in rejection, retraction, or other disciplinary measures to uphold publication integrity.

Authors are required to clearly acknowledge any use of generative AI tools in the article or book through a statement specifying: the full name of the tool (including version number), how the tool was used, and the rationale for its use. This transparency fosters trust and Accountability, enabling editors to evaluate whether generative AI tools have been employed responsibly and ensuring the integrity of the publication process.

If an author intends to use an AI tool, they must ensure that the tool is suitable and reliable for the proposed use, and that the applicable terms for the tool provide adequate protections and safeguards, for example, regarding intellectual property rights, confidentiality, and security.

Authors must not submit manuscripts that employ generative AI tools in a manner that substitutes for the core responsibilities of researchers and authors, for instance:

• generating text or code without rigorous revision;
• producing synthetic data to replace missing data in the absence of a robust methodology;
• creating any form of inaccurate content, including abstracts or supplementary material.

JCP does not permit the use of generative AI to create or manipulate images and figures, or to generate original research data, for use in our publications. The term “images and figures” encompasses photographs, charts, data tables, medical images, image stills, computer code, and formulas. The term “manipulation” includes adding, concealing, moving, removing, or introducing specific features within an image or figure.

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in any part of the research process must always be conducted with human oversight and transparency. Research ethics guidelines are still being updated to address the latest generative AI technologies. JCP will continue to update its editorial guidelines as technology and research ethics standards evolve.

Guidelines for Editors and Peer Reviewers

JCP strives for the highest standards of editorial integrity and transparency. Editors and peer reviewers play a key role in protecting confidentiality and proprietary rights. Therefore, they must not upload files, images, or information from unpublished manuscripts into generative AI tools, ensuring the trust placed in them is upheld and the publication process remains secure.

Editors

Editors are the guardians of the quality and Accountability of research content. Accordingly, editors must preserve the confidentiality of submission and peer review details. The use of manuscripts in generative AI systems may introduce risks relating to confidentiality, infringement of proprietary rights and data, and other hazards. Therefore, editors must not upload unpublished manuscripts, including any associated files, images, or related information, into generative AI software.

Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers are selected experts in their fields and must not use generative AI to analyze or summarize submitted articles, or any parts thereof, in preparing their reviews. Consequently, peer reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts or project proposals, including any associated files, images, or related information, into generative AI tools. Generative AI may be used solely to improve the language of a review; however, peer reviewers remain solely responsible for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of their reviews.