AI Policy

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

PIETAS: Jurnal Studi Agama dan Lintas Budaya recognizes the increasing use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and AI-assisted technologies in scholarly research, writing, translation, data analysis, and academic publishing. PIETAS permits the responsible use of such technologies when they support, rather than replace, human intellectual contribution, critical interpretation, scholarly judgment, ethical responsibility, and accountability.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, and editors and is intended to promote transparency, originality, confidentiality, research integrity, respect for religious and cultural diversity, and responsible use of artificial intelligence throughout the publication process.

AI Use by Authors

Authors may use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies to support manuscript preparation, including language improvement, grammar correction, readability, translation, organization, or other appropriate writing assistance.

However, AI-generated content must not replace the authors' own:

  • scholarly analysis;

  • critical reasoning;

  • theoretical or theological interpretation;

  • interpretation of religious texts or traditions;

  • interpretation of qualitative or ethnographic data;

  • cross-cultural analysis; or

  • original intellectual contribution.

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, scholarly validity, ethical appropriateness, and integrity of all content submitted to PIETAS.

Generative AI tools or AI-assisted systems must not be listed as authors or co-authors, because authorship requires intellectual responsibility, accountability, approval of the final manuscript, and responsibility for the integrity of the published work.

Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose the substantive use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies when such tools have been used in preparing, developing, analyzing, interpreting, translating, or substantially revising a manuscript.

The disclosure should identify:

  • the name of the AI tool or service used;

  • the purpose for which it was used; and

  • the extent of human review, verification, and editing.

Where applicable, the disclosure may be included before the References under the heading:

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

Example:

During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [name of AI tool/service] for [purpose]. The author(s) subsequently reviewed, verified, and edited the generated content and take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, interpretation, and integrity of the final manuscript.

The use of basic digital tools solely for spelling, grammar, punctuation, conventional formatting, or reference management does not normally require disclosure.

AI as Part of Research Methods

When artificial intelligence, machine learning, natural language processing, generative AI, computational text analysis, automated translation, or other AI-based technologies form part of the research methodology, authors must describe their use transparently in the Methods section.

Where relevant, authors should report:

  • the name and version of the AI tool, model, or system;

  • its role and purpose in the study;

  • the type of data or input used;

  • prompting, analytical, classification, or translation procedures where relevant;

  • validation and verification procedures;

  • the role of human supervision and interpretation;

  • potential limitations or sources of bias; and

  • relevant ethical, cultural, privacy, and data protection considerations.

The description should provide sufficient information for editors, reviewers, and readers to evaluate the appropriateness and reliability of the AI-assisted research process.

Accuracy and Verification

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

Generative AI systems may produce inaccurate, incomplete, biased, misleading, or fabricated information. Authors are therefore responsible for verifying:

  • factual statements;

  • historical information;

  • quotations;

  • translations;

  • scriptural or religious references;

  • theological claims;

  • cultural interpretations;

  • names of individuals, institutions, communities, or traditions;

  • references and citations;

  • research data; and

  • conclusions derived from AI-assisted processes.

AI-generated references must not be included unless the authors have independently verified that the original sources exist and accurately support the statements for which they are cited.

AI, Religious Texts, and Translation

Particular care must be taken when AI is used to translate, summarize, interpret, or analyze religious texts, sacred writings, historical manuscripts, theological documents, oral traditions, or culturally significant materials.

AI-generated translations or interpretations must not be presented as authoritative without appropriate scholarly verification.

Authors are responsible for checking AI-assisted translations against reliable primary texts, recognized editions, qualified translations, or relevant linguistic and scholarly expertise.

Where an AI-assisted translation materially affects the research argument or findings, its use should be disclosed and the verification process described.

AI, Research Integrity, and Scholarly Misconduct

The use of AI to fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or misrepresent scholarly evidence is strictly prohibited.

Prohibited practices include, but are not limited to:

  • fabricating research participants or informants;

  • generating fictitious interviews, quotations, testimonies, or field notes;

  • inventing religious leaders, communities, organizations, traditions, or historical events;

  • generating nonexistent references or archival sources;

  • fabricating or falsifying survey, ethnographic, textual, or historical data;

  • presenting AI-generated interpretations as authentic participant statements;

  • manipulating evidence to support predetermined theological, ideological, or political conclusions;

  • creating false documentation of religious or cultural practices;

  • using AI to conceal plagiarism; and

  • presenting AI-generated content as genuine field or archival evidence.

Such practices may be treated as serious violations of PIETAS's Publication Ethics.

AI-Generated Images, Figures, and Multimedia

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI when it has been used to create or substantially modify figures, images, illustrations, audio, video, maps, or other materials included in a manuscript.

AI-generated or AI-modified content must not be presented as authentic documentation of:

  • religious ceremonies;

  • sacred sites;

  • cultural practices;

  • historical events;

  • community members;

  • fieldwork;

  • archival materials; or

  • research evidence

when the material does not represent an actual documented source or event.

Any AI-generated visual or multimedia content must be clearly identified and must comply with applicable ethical, copyright, privacy, confidentiality, cultural, and intellectual property requirements.

Privacy, Religious Identity, and Sensitive Data

Authors must exercise particular caution when using AI systems with data relating to religion, belief, ethnicity, culture, political identity, or community membership.

Confidential, sensitive, or personally identifiable information must not be uploaded to public generative AI systems unless appropriate authorization, informed consent, ethical approval, and adequate data protection safeguards are in place.

This includes, where applicable:

  • names and contact information;

  • religious affiliation or denomination;

  • conversion history;

  • spiritual or personal testimonies;

  • interview transcripts;

  • confidential field notes;

  • identifiable photographs or recordings;

  • information concerning religious minorities;

  • politically or socially sensitive religious data;

  • community disputes or conflict-related information; and

  • other sensitive personal or community information.

Authors remain responsible for protecting the dignity, privacy, confidentiality, and safety of research participants and communities.

AI and Indigenous, Sacred, or Culturally Restricted Knowledge

Authors must not upload sacred, confidential, indigenous, culturally restricted, community-owned, or otherwise sensitive knowledge into public AI systems when doing so may violate ethical obligations, community protocols, confidentiality agreements, cultural rights, intellectual property rights, or participants' expectations.

Where research involves indigenous peoples, local religious communities, traditional knowledge holders, or culturally sensitive materials, authors should consider whether the use of AI is appropriate before processing such information.

Consent to participate in research should not automatically be interpreted as permission to upload participant or community data into external AI systems.

Bias, Stereotyping, and Religious Representation

Authors must critically evaluate AI-generated content for possible bias, stereotyping, discriminatory representation, or oversimplification of religious and cultural groups.

AI-generated descriptions must not be relied upon uncritically when discussing:

  • religious minorities;

  • indigenous religions;

  • denominations or sects;

  • ethnic communities;

  • gender and religion;

  • interreligious conflict;

  • religious extremism;

  • conversion;

  • sacred practices; or

  • other socially sensitive topics.

Authors remain responsible for ensuring that scholarly analysis is evidence-based, contextually appropriate, respectful, and free from unnecessary discriminatory or inflammatory representations.

AI Use by Reviewers

Submitted manuscripts are confidential documents. Reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts, manuscript excerpts, interview transcripts, research data, supplementary materials, author information, or other confidential content into public or external generative AI systems where confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property protection, cultural sensitivity, or data security cannot be assured.

AI tools must not replace the reviewer's independent scholarly judgment.

Reviewers remain fully responsible for the academic evaluation, critical assessment, recommendations, and comments contained in their peer-review reports.

AI Use by Editors

Editors must protect the confidentiality, intellectual property, and sensitive scholarly content of submitted manuscripts.

Unpublished manuscripts, peer-review reports, field data, interview materials, participant information, or confidential editorial materials must not be uploaded to public generative AI systems for manuscript evaluation, summarization, reviewer selection, editorial decision-making, or other purposes where confidentiality cannot be assured.

Editorial decisions must be made by qualified human editors based on:

  • scholarly merit;

  • peer-review reports;

  • methodological or conceptual quality;

  • ethical compliance;

  • journal policies; and

  • relevance to PIETAS's focus and scope.

AI systems must not independently determine whether a manuscript is accepted or rejected.

Violations of the AI Policy

Failure to disclose significant AI use, fabrication of AI-generated information, submission of unverifiable references, unauthorized processing of confidential or sensitive religious and cultural data, misrepresentation of AI-generated materials, or other inappropriate uses of artificial intelligence may result in editorial action.

Depending on the nature and severity of the violation, PIETAS may:

  • request clarification or manuscript revision;

  • reject the manuscript;

  • issue a correction;

  • publish an expression of concern;

  • retract a published article; or

  • take other appropriate actions in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics.

Policy Updates

Artificial intelligence technologies and scholarly publishing practices continue to evolve. PIETAS may periodically review and update this policy to reflect developments in technology, research integrity, publication ethics, privacy protection, cultural sensitivity, intellectual property, and responsible scholarly communication.