1. Purpose and Editorial Commitment

The Journal of Integrated Elementary Education (JIEEd) recognizes the growing role of artificial intelligence (AI) in educational research, academic writing, and scholarly publishing.

The journal supports the responsible, transparent, and ethically appropriate use of AI-assisted technologies while maintaining the principles of scientific integrity, human accountability, confidentiality, originality, and editorial independence.

This policy establishes clear requirements for the use of AI by authors, peer reviewers, editors, and editorial personnel throughout the research and publication process.

The policy is informed by internationally recognized scholarly publishing principles, including guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), as well as the 2026 Indonesian Scientific Journal Accreditation Technical Guidelines, particularly Section C.3 concerning artificial intelligence.

AI may support certain research and publishing activities, but it must not replace human intellectual responsibility, independent scholarly evaluation, or editorial decision-making.

2. Scope and Definitions

This policy applies to all manuscripts submitted to or published in JIEEd, including Original Research Articles and Review Articles.

It covers the use of generative AI and other AI-assisted technologies in:

Research planning and manuscript preparation.
Academic writing, translation, and language editing.
Literature identification and evidence synthesis.
Research data processing and analysis.
Preparation of tables, figures, and visual materials.
Editorial screening and administrative activities.
Peer review and editorial decision-making.
Post-publication corrections and scholarly communication.

For the purposes of this policy, AI-assisted technologies include large language models, generative AI systems, AI-powered writing tools, automated analytical systems, and related technologies capable of generating, transforming, interpreting, or evaluating content.

Routine spelling and formatting tools that do not substantively generate or alter scholarly content are distinguished from AI assistance that materially contributes to research or manuscript preparation.

3. Fundamental Principles

JIEEd applies the following principles to all AI-related activities.

3.1 Human Responsibility

Authors, editors, and other responsible individuals remain accountable for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical compliance of their work.

AI-generated output must not be accepted as scientifically valid without independent human verification.

3.2 Transparency and Disclosure

Substantive AI assistance must be disclosed according to the responsibilities of the individual and the nature of the activity.

Disclosure should enable editors and readers to understand how AI contributed to the research or publication process.

3.3 Scientific Integrity

AI must not be used to fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or misrepresent research data, findings, references, or interpretations.

3.4 Confidentiality and Data Protection

Unpublished manuscripts, confidential editorial information, and protected research data must not be disclosed to unauthorized AI systems.

3.5 Editorial Independence

Scientific evaluations, peer-review reports, and editorial decisions must remain the responsibility of qualified human researchers, reviewers, and editors.

3.6 Compliance with Publication Ethics

All AI-assisted activities must comply with JIEEd's Author Guidelines, Publication Ethics, Peer Review Policy, and applicable legal and ethical requirements.

4. AI Use by Authors

Authors may use AI-assisted technologies for legitimate research and manuscript-preparation activities when such use is transparent, scientifically appropriate, and consistent with research-integrity requirements.

4.1 Permitted AI Assistance

Subject to appropriate verification and disclosure, AI may assist with:

Language and Writing Support

Grammar and spelling correction.
Academic language refinement.
Translation assistance.
Improvement of readability and linguistic clarity.
Organization of draft material without misrepresenting the author's scholarly arguments.

Research and Analytical Support

Preliminary identification of potentially relevant literature.
Assistance in organizing research information.
Development or refinement of analytical code.
Computational data processing.
Supporting qualitative or quantitative analytical workflows.
Preparation of explanatory diagrams or illustrative materials.

Review Article Preparation

Assistance with organizing search terms or search strategies.
Supporting reference screening or classification where methodologically justified.
Assisting with evidence extraction or synthesis under appropriate human verification.

Such assistance must not substitute for the researchers' independent assessment of evidence, methodological decisions, or scholarly interpretation.

Authors must ensure that any AI-assisted research procedures are described with sufficient transparency and reproducibility.

4.2 Human Verification Requirements

Authors must independently verify all AI-assisted material before submission.

This includes checking:

The factual accuracy of generated statements.
The authenticity and relevance of references.
The validity of research procedures.
The accuracy of analytical code and computational outputs.
The correspondence between reported findings and underlying evidence.
The appropriateness of theoretical interpretations.
Potential biases, inaccuracies, or unsupported claims.

Authors must not rely on AI-generated summaries or interpretations without consulting the relevant scholarly sources and research evidence.

5. Prohibited AI Practices by Authors

JIEEd prohibits the use of AI in ways that compromise scientific integrity, transparency, or research ethics.

Prohibited practices include:

Data fabrication: Generating fictitious research participants, observations, measurements, interviews, or experimental results and presenting them as authentic data.
Data falsification: Altering, suppressing, or manipulating research evidence to support predetermined findings.
Fabricated references: Including nonexistent publications, incorrect DOI information, invented quotations, or misleading citations.
Misleading scholarly content: Presenting unsupported AI-generated arguments or interpretations as established research findings.
Fraudulent research reporting: Describing research procedures, participant interactions, analyses, or ethical approvals that did not occur.
Undisclosed substantive AI use: Concealing AI assistance when disclosure is required under this policy.
Unauthorized disclosure of protected information: Uploading confidential participant data, unpublished third-party materials, or identifiable student records to AI systems without appropriate authorization and safeguards.
Inappropriate manipulation of visual evidence: Creating or modifying images, figures, recordings, or other materials in ways that misrepresent actual research evidence.
Misrepresentation of authorship: Listing an AI system as an author or attributing responsibility for scholarly work to a nonhuman system.

AI may not be used to replace the authors' responsibility for research design, interpretation of evidence, scientific conclusions, or manuscript integrity.

6. AI Authorship and Intellectual Accountability

AI tools, chatbots, language models, and automated systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to JIEEd.

Authorship requires intellectual accountability, approval of the final manuscript, responsibility for the published content, and the ability to respond to scholarly and ethical concerns.

AI systems cannot fulfill these responsibilities.

Human authors remain responsible for:

The originality and accuracy of the manuscript.
The integrity of research data and methods.
Proper source attribution and copyright compliance.
The accuracy of AI-assisted outputs.
All scholarly interpretations and conclusions.
Compliance with the journal's ethical requirements.

AI-generated text or output must not be treated as a substitute for citing the original scholarly literature.

7. Mandatory AI Use Disclosure by Authors

Authors must disclose substantive AI assistance in manuscript preparation or research activities.

The disclosure must accurately reflect the nature and extent of AI involvement.

7.1 Information to Be Disclosed

Where applicable, authors should identify:

Disclosure Element	Required Information
AI Tool	Name of the AI tool or system used
Provider and Version	Developer or provider and model/version, where identifiable and relevant
Purpose	Specific reason for using the tool
Stage of Use	Research planning, analysis, writing, editing, or another stage
Nature of Assistance	How the tool contributed to the work
Human Verification	How outputs were reviewed and validated

7.2 Location of the Disclosure

Writing and Language Assistance

Substantive AI assistance in writing, translation, or language editing should be disclosed in an AI Use Declaration or another appropriate disclosure section of the manuscript.

Research Methods and Data Analysis

When AI forms part of data collection, coding, analysis, evidence synthesis, or another methodological procedure, authors must explain its use in the Methods section.

The methodological description should provide enough information to evaluate and, where appropriate, reproduce the process.

OJS Submission

Authors must also complete any AI-related declarations required by the journal's online submission system.

7.3 Routine Language Tools

Routine spelling correction, basic grammar checking, and formatting functions that do not materially generate or change scholarly content do not ordinarily require a detailed AI declaration.

However, substantive AI-assisted rewriting, content development, analytical assistance, or other material contributions must be disclosed.

When uncertain, authors are encouraged to disclose the assistance transparently.

7.4 Example AI Use Declaration

Example A — AI-Assisted Language Editing

During manuscript preparation, the authors used [AI Tool, Provider, and Version] to assist with English-language editing and readability. The authors independently reviewed and revised the output and verified the accuracy of the manuscript. All research data, analyses, interpretations, and conclusions remain the responsibility of the authors.

Example B — AI-Assisted Research Analysis

The authors used [AI Tool, Provider, and Version] to support [specific analytical activity]. The tool was applied during [research stage] using [brief description of relevant procedures]. All AI-assisted outputs were independently evaluated and validated through [verification procedure]. The authors take full responsibility for the research findings and interpretations.

Example C — No Substantive AI Assistance

The authors declare that no generative AI or other substantive AI-assisted technologies were used in the preparation of this manuscript.

These examples must be adapted to the actual circumstances. Authors must not provide declarations that misrepresent their use of AI.

8. AI in Educational Research Involving Children

Research involving elementary school students requires particular care when using AI-assisted technologies.

Authors must protect children's privacy, dignity, safety, and personal information.

AI-assisted educational research must comply with applicable institutional requirements, data protection regulations, consent procedures, and research ethics principles.

8.1 Protection of Student Information

Authors must not upload identifiable student information, confidential school records, interview transcripts, photographs, recordings, or other protected data to unauthorized AI platforms.

Relevant safeguards may include:

Data minimization and appropriate anonymization.
Institutional authorization when required.
Parental or guardian consent and child assent, where applicable.
Secure data-processing procedures.
Restrictions on third-party access and data retention.
Verification that the intended AI processing is consistent with participant consent and research ethics approval.

Anonymization alone may not be sufficient when contextual information could reasonably permit re-identification.

8.2 Research Evaluating AI-Based Educational Interventions

JIEEd welcomes rigorous and ethical research on AI-supported educational tools, learning systems, and pedagogical interventions that align with the journal's Aims and Scope.

Such research must explain the role of AI in the intervention or study, relevant implementation procedures, limitations, potential risks, and safeguards.

Studying an AI-based educational intervention is distinct from using AI to generate or evaluate peer-review reports.

9. AI-Generated Images, Figures, and Research Materials

AI-assisted visual materials must be used transparently and responsibly.

Authors may use AI-generated explanatory illustrations or diagrams when they are scientifically appropriate, properly disclosed, and consistent with copyright and publication requirements.

AI-generated material must not be presented as authentic research observations or original participant data when it is not.

The following practices are prohibited:

Creating artificial research evidence and presenting it as genuine.
Generating fictitious classroom documentation.
Fabricating participant photographs or observations.
Altering scientific figures to conceal or misrepresent findings.
Creating misleading visual representations of quantitative or qualitative evidence.

Where AI-assisted images are included, authors should explain their origin and purpose in the figure caption, declaration, or methodological description, as appropriate.

Authors must ensure that the use of generated material does not infringe copyright, violate privacy, or misrepresent educational research.

10. AI Use by Peer Reviewers

JIEEd strictly prohibits peer reviewers from using artificial intelligence when evaluating submitted manuscripts.

This prohibition follows the requirements of the 2026 Indonesian Scientific Journal Accreditation Technical Guidelines, Section C.3.

10.1 Prohibited Reviewer Activities

Peer reviewers must not use AI tools to:

Analyze the scientific content of a submitted manuscript.
Evaluate research originality, methodology, evidence, or conclusions.
Summarize manuscripts for the purpose of conducting peer review.
Assess manuscript quality or generate evaluative judgments.
Draft, generate, rewrite, or substantively edit peer-review comments.
Produce recommendations concerning manuscript acceptance, revision, or rejection.
Upload or enter an unpublished manuscript, in whole or in part, into an AI application.
Upload manuscript-related figures, tables, data, appendices, reviewer reports, or confidential correspondence to AI systems.

The prohibition applies whether AI is used as the primary evaluator or as an auxiliary tool for the peer-review assessment.

10.2 Independent Human Evaluation

Peer-review reports must reflect each reviewer's own scientific expertise, independent analysis, and professional judgment.

Reviewers are expected to evaluate submissions directly and provide constructive, evidence-based comments.

Scientific weaknesses, ethical concerns, and methodological limitations must be assessed through independent scholarly reasoning.

10.3 Reviewer Declaration

JIEEd requires reviewers to comply with this policy throughout the evaluation process.

The following declaration may be incorporated into the journal's OJS review form:

Reviewer AI Compliance Declaration

I confirm that I have independently evaluated this manuscript without using artificial intelligence to analyze, assess, summarize, or generate peer-review comments or recommendations. I have not uploaded the manuscript or any part of its confidential materials to an AI application.

Reviewers who cannot comply with this requirement must decline the assignment or inform the handling editor.

11. AI Use by Editors and Editorial Personnel

JIEEd permits carefully controlled AI assistance for limited editorial and administrative purposes when such use is consistent with confidentiality, transparency, data protection, and applicable regulations.

11.1 Permitted Administrative Assistance

Subject to appropriate safeguards, AI may assist with activities such as:

Preparing general editorial communication templates.
Improving the language of non-confidential administrative announcements.
Organizing publicly available journal information.
Supporting internal workflow documentation that contains no protected manuscript information.
Other limited administrative tasks are authorized by the journal.

Any substantive AI assistance used by the editorial team must be disclosed or appropriately documented according to its purpose and context.

11.2 Prohibited Editorial Practices

Editors and editorial personnel must not use AI to replace human scientific evaluation or editorial responsibility.

AI must not be used to:

Independently determine manuscript scientific merit.
Replace expert evaluation of research design, evidence, or conclusions.
Generate final editorial decisions without independent human judgment.
Substitute for qualified peer reviewers.
Automatically resolve allegations of research misconduct.
Make acceptance or rejection decisions without appropriate editorial assessment.
Disclose unpublished manuscripts or confidential review materials to unauthorized AI systems.

11.3 Editorial Accountability

The Editor-in-Chief and authorized editors remain responsible for all editorial decisions.

AI-generated recommendations or administrative assistance do not transfer or reduce editorial accountability.

Editorial decisions must be based on scientific merit, appropriate peer-review evidence, ethical compliance, and the independent judgment of qualified human editors.

11.4 Editorial AI Disclosure

Where substantive AI assistance is used in permitted editorial functions, the editorial office should document:

The AI tool used.
The purpose and scope of the activity.
The type of information processed.
The responsible editorial personnel.
Relevant human verification.
Applicable confidentiality and data-protection safeguards.

Such documentation supports transparency, accountability, and internal quality assurance.

12. Confidentiality, Intellectual Property, and Data Security

All parties involved in JIEEd's publishing process must protect unpublished scholarly material and confidential information.

This includes:

Submitted manuscripts and revisions.
Unpublished research data.
Reviewer reports and recommendations.
Confidential editorial correspondence.
Research participant information.
Copyrighted or proprietary materials.
Other information is protected by ethical, contractual, or legal requirements.

Authors must ensure that any transfer of research material to AI systems is authorized and consistent with participant consent, applicable rights, and data-protection requirements.

Editors and editorial personnel must not upload confidential manuscripts to unauthorized external AI services.

Peer reviewers are subject to the stricter prohibition established in Section 10 of this policy and must not upload submitted manuscript content to AI applications.

JIEEd does not treat the use of publicly accessible or commercially available AI systems as automatically confidential or secure.

13. AI Detection and Editorial Screening

JIEEd may use authorized similarity-screening and editorial quality-assurance tools as part of its established manuscript-screening process.

The journal uses Turnitin to support similarity assessment.

Where an AI-writing detection function is available, its output must be treated as a preliminary indicator rather than conclusive evidence of AI use or research misconduct.

13.1 Limitations of Automated Detection

Automated AI-detection systems may produce inaccurate or misleading results, including false positives and false negatives.

Therefore:

AI-detection scores do not independently establish misconduct.
Manuscripts must not be rejected solely because of an automated AI-writing score.
A low detection score does not establish compliance with the journal's AI disclosure requirements.
Editors must evaluate concerns contextually and consider available evidence.

13.2 Human Editorial Assessment

When concerns arise regarding undisclosed AI use, the editor may request clarification, relevant disclosures, methodological explanations, or supporting documentation.

All assessments must be proportionate, fair, and consistent with the journal's Publication Ethics and Research Misconduct policies.

Authorized screening tools must be used in accordance with applicable confidentiality and data-protection requirements.

14. Non-Compliance and Ethical Investigation

JIEEd takes violations of its AI Use Policy seriously.

Potential violations include:

Undisclosed substantive AI assistance.
Fabricated AI-generated research data or references.
Misleading reporting of AI-supported analyses.
Unauthorized disclosure of confidential research material.
Prohibited use of AI during peer review.
Improper reliance on AI for editorial decisions.

14.1 Preliminary Assessment

Editors assess credible concerns based on available evidence.

An allegation or automated detection result alone is not proof of misconduct.

14.2 Opportunity for Clarification

Where appropriate, the individuals concerned may be asked to explain their actions and provide relevant information.

The journal seeks to distinguish honest errors, misunderstanding of disclosure requirements, and deliberate or serious misconduct.

14.3 Corrective and Editorial Actions

Depending on the seriousness of the violation and the stage of publication, possible actions include:

Requesting an amended AI disclosure.
Requiring correction or revision of affected content.
Requesting additional verification of research evidence.
Reassigning a manuscript to a different reviewer.
Disregarding a compromised peer-review report.
Suspending or discontinuing reviewer assignments.
Rejecting a manuscript when justified.
Referring serious concerns to the relevant institutions.
Issuing a correction, expression of concern, or retraction after publication when warranted.

Actions must be consistent with due process, proportionality, and the journal's established ethical procedures.

15. Responsibilities and Compliance Summary

Role	AI Use Requirements
Authors	Responsible AI assistance may be permitted; substantive use must be disclosed and scientifically verified.
Peer Reviewers	AI use for manuscript analysis, evaluation, review-comment preparation, or uploading submitted manuscript content is prohibited.
Editors	Limited authorized administrative assistance may be permitted; substantive use must be documented or disclosed; AI cannot replace scientific or editorial judgment.
Editorial Personnel	Must follow authorized administrative procedures and maintain confidentiality, transparency, and human oversight
Publisher	Supports implementation, oversight, and periodic review of the journal's AI-related publishing practices

These requirements apply throughout the manuscript submission, evaluation, revision, publication, and post-publication processes.

16. Policy Implementation and Review

JIEEd periodically reviews this policy to respond to developments in AI technologies, scholarly publishing standards, research ethics, and applicable regulations.

Any changes must preserve the principles of scientific integrity, editorial independence, confidentiality, transparency, and human accountability.

Substantive updates will be communicated through the journal's official website.

This policy must be read together with the journal's Author Guidelines, Peer Review Policy, Publication Ethics, and Research Misconduct procedures.

Related Journal Policies

Policy References

This policy draws on the following guidance:

Ministry of Higher Education, Science, and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia. Decree of the Director General of Science and Technology No. 374/DST/D.D1/HM.01.01/2026, Technical Guidelines for Scientific Journal Accreditation, Section C.3.
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) — Core Practices
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) — Use of Artificial Intelligence in Publishing
Elsevier — Generative AI Policies for Journals