AI Policy

Use of AI and AI-Assisted Writing Technologies Policy

Research and Innovation in Applied Linguistics (RIAL)

1. Purpose and Scope

Research and Innovation in Applied Linguistics (RIAL) recognizes that artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies can support various activities in scholarly research, academic writing, and publishing. These technologies may assist with language editing, translation, literature organization, data processing, coding, visualization, and other research-related tasks. However, their use also raises important concerns regarding research integrity, authorship, originality, accuracy, confidentiality, intellectual property, research ethics, and accountability.

This policy establishes the principles and requirements governing the responsible use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in manuscripts submitted to, reviewed by, edited by, or published in RIAL. It applies to authors, co-authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and other individuals involved in the journal's editorial and publication processes.

The policy covers, but is not limited to, generative AI systems, large language models (LLMs), AI writing assistants, machine translation tools, AI-powered research assistants, automated data-analysis tools, AI-generated images and illustrations, and other technologies that generate, transform, analyze, or evaluate scholarly content.

RIAL supports the responsible use of AI as an assistive technology while maintaining the principle that scholarly judgment, intellectual contribution, and accountability must remain with human researchers.

2. General Principles

The use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in scholarly publishing must follow these principles:

Human accountability: Human authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, validity, interpretation, and integrity of their work, including any content produced or modified using AI.
Transparency: The use of AI must be disclosed when required by this policy, particularly when it contributes to manuscript content, research procedures, data analysis, interpretation, or visual materials.
Research integrity: AI must not be used to fabricate or falsify data, invent sources, misrepresent findings, conceal plagiarism, or otherwise undermine scholarly integrity.
Confidentiality and privacy: AI use must not compromise confidential manuscripts, unpublished research, personal information, research participant data, or other protected materials.
Intellectual property and attribution: Authors must respect copyright, licensing conditions, attribution requirements, and applicable intellectual property laws and agreements.
Methodological transparency: AI-assisted research procedures must be described sufficiently to permit appropriate evaluation, verification, and, where applicable, replication.
Fairness and critical evaluation: AI-generated outputs must be critically evaluated for factual errors, bias, cultural insensitivity, linguistic limitations, and other potential shortcomings.
Human authorship: AI tools cannot be credited as authors or replace the intellectual and ethical responsibilities of human contributors.

3. Acceptable Uses of AI

RIAL permits the responsible use of AI-assisted technologies, provided that authors comply with this policy and remain accountable for the submitted work.

3.1 Language Editing and Manuscript Improvement

Authors may use AI tools to assist with:

Correcting grammar, spelling, punctuation, and sentence structure.
Improving readability, clarity, coherence, and academic style.
Improving the organization and flow of existing text.
Translating or refining language in a manuscript.
Identifying unclear expressions, redundancies, or inconsistencies.
Suggesting alternative wording for text originally developed by the authors.

Routine assistance limited to spelling, grammar, punctuation, and comparable surface-level language correction does not normally require a separate disclosure statement. However, substantive rewriting, extensive paraphrasing, translation that materially shapes the manuscript, or the generation of new scholarly content must be disclosed.

Authors must ensure that language editing does not change the intended meaning, distort findings, introduce unsupported claims, or misrepresent the original sources.

3.2 Idea Development and Scholarly Writing

AI may be used to support preliminary brainstorming, outline development, research-question refinement, or the organization of arguments. Authors may also use AI to explore alternative explanations or identify possible gaps in their reasoning.

However, authors must independently assess the relevance, originality, validity, and scholarly contribution of the resulting work. AI-generated arguments, interpretations, literature reviews, or substantive manuscript passages must not be presented as independently verified scholarly contributions without appropriate human evaluation.

The use of AI does not replace the need for a genuine intellectual contribution by the authors.

3.3 Literature Search and Reference Management

AI tools may assist with identifying potential search terms, organizing literature, summarizing research materials, or locating potentially relevant publications.

Authors must independently verify every cited source against the original publication or another reliable bibliographic record. They must confirm the accuracy of authors' names, publication titles, publication years, journal names, volume and issue numbers, page ranges, digital object identifiers (DOIs), and other bibliographic information.

AI-generated references that do not correspond to genuine publications must never be included in a manuscript. Authors must not rely on AI-generated summaries as substitutes for examining source materials when making substantive claims about those sources.

AI tools must not be used to create a misleading impression of comprehensive literature coverage or to conceal relevant contrary evidence.

3.4 Research Design, Data Analysis, and Interpretation

AI may support research planning, qualitative or quantitative data processing, coding assistance, transcription, categorization, visualization, statistical programming, and preliminary interpretation.

When AI contributes substantively to the research process, authors must describe its role in the appropriate methodological section. They must explain how outputs were checked, how errors were addressed, and how final analytical decisions were made.

AI-generated analyses, classifications, themes, interpretations, or statistical outputs must not be accepted uncritically. Authors must verify the appropriateness of the analytical procedure, the accuracy of the outputs, and the consistency between the evidence and the reported findings.

The use of AI must not replace appropriate methodological rigor, researcher reflexivity, or disciplinary judgment.

3.5 Translation, Transcription, and Language Research

AI-assisted translation, transcription, speech recognition, subtitling, and linguistic annotation may be used when appropriate to the research design.

Authors must evaluate the accuracy of these outputs, particularly where linguistic nuance, pragmatic meaning, discourse context, cultural references, speaker identity, or interactional features are important to the analysis.

In applied linguistics research, authors must be especially careful when AI processes multilingual data, dialects, nonstandard language, code-switching, spoken interaction, or context-dependent expressions. AI-generated translations or transcriptions must not silently replace the original data or distort the linguistic phenomena being investigated.

Where AI materially contributes to data preparation or analysis, its use must be reported in the Methods section.

3.6 Tables, Figures, Images, and Other Visual Materials

AI tools may be used to assist with the design of diagrams, illustrations, conceptual models, and other visual materials, subject to the requirements of accuracy, transparency, copyright, and research integrity.

Authors must disclose AI-generated or materially AI-modified visual materials. They must ensure that such materials do not misrepresent evidence, fabricate research observations, alter findings, or reproduce protected material without appropriate authorization.

AI must not be used to manipulate research images, visual evidence, or other empirical materials in ways that mislead readers about the underlying data.

Where AI-generated images are used to illustrate research concepts rather than represent empirical evidence, their illustrative nature must be made clear when necessary to avoid misunderstanding.

4. Prohibited and Unacceptable Uses of AI

The following practices are prohibited or may constitute research misconduct, depending on the circumstances:

Fabrication or falsification: Generating, altering, or inventing research data, participant responses, quotations, observations, experimental results, statistical results, or other evidence and presenting them as authentic.
Fabricated references: Inventing publications, authors, quotations, DOIs, page numbers, or other bibliographic information.
Plagiarism and unattributed appropriation: Using AI to reproduce, paraphrase, or transform another person's work or ideas without appropriate acknowledgment and attribution.
Misrepresentation of authorship: Listing AI systems as authors, attributing AI-generated intellectual contributions to human researchers without appropriate scrutiny, or concealing the extent of AI involvement when disclosure is required.
Misleading analysis: Presenting AI-generated interpretations, themes, classifications, or conclusions as verified findings without examining the supporting evidence.
Manipulation of evidence: Using AI to create deceptive images, alter empirical evidence, or produce misleading representations of research findings.
Unauthorized disclosure: Entering confidential manuscripts, sensitive research data, personal information, or protected materials into AI systems without appropriate authorization and adequate safeguards.
Deceptive publication practices: Using AI to generate large quantities of low-quality or repetitive manuscripts, manufacture citations, simulate scholarly engagement, or circumvent legitimate peer-review and publication requirements.
Concealment of material AI involvement: Failing to disclose substantive AI use when required by this policy, or providing a misleading or incomplete disclosure.
Uncritical dependence: Relying on AI outputs as authoritative evidence without verification, particularly for factual claims, citations, research findings, and methodological decisions.

AI-generated content is not automatically original, accurate, unbiased, or free from plagiarism. Compliance with this policy requires meaningful human oversight rather than merely declaring that AI was used.

5. AI Authorship and Accountability

AI systems, chatbots, and AI-assisted technologies cannot be listed as authors, co-authors, or contributors in the author byline of an RIAL publication.

Authorship requires intellectual and ethical responsibilities that AI systems cannot assume, including accountability for the work, approval of the final manuscript, disclosure of relevant conflicts of interest, and the ability to respond to questions concerning research integrity.

Human authors must satisfy RIAL's authorship and contribution requirements independently of any AI assistance received.

All listed authors are responsible for ensuring that:

The manuscript represents a genuine scholarly contribution.
AI-generated content has been critically reviewed and appropriately revised.
All factual claims, citations, quotations, data, and analytical outputs have been verified.
The manuscript complies with applicable ethical standards and intellectual property requirements.
The submitted and published work does not contain fabricated, falsified, misleading, or plagiarized material.

AI assistance may be acknowledged where appropriate, but acknowledgment of a tool does not transfer responsibility from the authors to the tool or its developer.

6. AI Disclosure Requirements for Authors

Authors must disclose the use of AI whenever it contributes substantively to manuscript content, research procedures, data processing, analysis, interpretation, or visual materials.

Disclosure must be specific enough to allow editors, reviewers, and readers to understand the nature and extent of AI involvement.

6.1 What Must Be Disclosed

The disclosure should identify, where applicable:

The name of the AI tool or system and its provider.
The model or version, if known and relevant.
The purpose for which the tool was used.
The sections, materials, or stages of the research affected.
The nature of the AI contribution, including whether it generated, transformed, analyzed, translated, classified, or visualized content.
The human verification or validation procedures applied to the outputs.

Authors are encouraged to retain relevant prompts, settings, outputs, and records of AI-assisted procedures when these are important for research transparency or reproducibility.

6.2 Where to Disclose AI Use

The appropriate location depends on the nature of the use:

Acknowledgments: For substantive assistance with manuscript drafting, rewriting, translation, or language development.
Methods section: For AI used in data collection, data processing, transcription, coding, analysis, interpretation, or other research procedures.
Figure or table captions and associated notes: For AI-generated or materially AI-modified visual or tabular content, where appropriate.
Cover letter or submission declaration: To provide the editor with a clear statement of the AI tools used and their purposes.

A single disclosure may be sufficient for several closely related uses if it clearly explains the relevant activities. Where AI contributes to both manuscript preparation and the research methodology, separate statements may be appropriate.

6.3 Suggested Disclosure Statements

A. Language editing

"The authors used [name of tool and version, if known] to assist with language editing and improving the readability of the manuscript. The authors reviewed and revised the suggested changes and take full responsibility for the final content."

B. Substantive text generation or rewriting

"The authors used [name of tool and version, if known] to assist with drafting or revising parts of the manuscript, specifically [identify the relevant sections or purpose]. All AI-generated suggestions were critically evaluated and revised by the authors, who take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the final manuscript."

C. Data analysis or research procedures

"The authors used [name of tool and version, if known] to assist with [describe the specific analytical or research task]. The tool was used to [explain its role in the procedure]. The authors independently evaluated the outputs and verified their appropriateness against the research data and methodological requirements."

D. Translation or transcription

"The authors used [name of tool and version, if known] to assist with [translation, transcription, or linguistic annotation] of [identify the relevant materials]. The resulting outputs were reviewed and checked by the authors to ensure that the original meaning and relevant linguistic features were preserved."

E. AI-generated figures or illustrations

"The authors used [name of tool and version, if known] to generate or materially modify [identify the relevant figure, illustration, or visual material]. The visual material was reviewed by the authors for accuracy, appropriateness, and compliance with applicable intellectual property requirements."

These examples should be adapted to reflect the actual use of AI. Authors must not use a disclosure statement that inaccurately describes their procedures.

6.4 Uses That Do Not Normally Require Disclosure

Routine spelling checks, punctuation correction, and basic grammar correction that do not materially affect the substance of the manuscript generally do not require a separate disclosure statement.

When a tool moves beyond routine correction into substantive rewriting, content generation, research analysis, or other material intellectual work, the relevant disclosure requirements apply.

If authors are uncertain whether their use is substantive, they should disclose it.

7. AI Use in Peer Review

Peer review is a confidential scholarly process that requires independent expert judgment, impartiality, and professional accountability.

Reviewers must not upload or transfer submitted manuscripts, unpublished research findings, supplementary files, author identities, or confidential correspondence to public or third-party AI systems when confidentiality, data protection, and permitted use cannot be assured.

Reviewers must not use AI to generate an entire peer-review report or to make substantive evaluative judgments in place of their own expert assessment.

AI use in reviewing manuscripts is permitted only where the journal has explicitly authorized the relevant use and the tool's confidentiality and data-protection arrangements are adequate. Any authorization is subject to the following conditions:

The reviewer remains responsible for the originality, accuracy, fairness, and substance of the review.
Confidential manuscript content must not be disclosed to unauthorized systems or parties.
AI outputs must not substitute for the reviewer's independent assessment of the manuscript's methodology, evidence, originality, significance, or limitations.
Reviewers must not use AI to identify, infer, or disclose confidential author identities in a manner that undermines the journal's peer-review model.
Reviewers must disclose AI assistance to the handling editor when it materially contributes to the review or related correspondence, in accordance with the journal's instructions.

Reviewers must not submit confidential peer-review reports or editorial correspondence to unauthorized AI systems. They must also ensure that AI-generated feedback does not introduce unsupported allegations, inappropriate criticism, fabricated citations, or discriminatory language.

Where the use of AI is not authorized or confidentiality cannot be assured, reviewers must conduct the review without such assistance.

8. AI Use by Editors and Editorial Board Members

Editors and editorial board members must exercise independent judgment and maintain the confidentiality, fairness, and integrity of the editorial process.

AI may be used for limited administrative or editorial support where authorized by the journal and where confidentiality, security, and data-protection requirements are satisfied. Examples may include general correspondence drafting, workflow administration, or language correction that does not expose confidential information.

Editors and editorial board members must not:

Upload confidential submissions, reviewer reports, editorial deliberations, or author information to unauthorized AI systems.
Delegate final decisions concerning acceptance, rejection, revision, ethical concerns, or misconduct to AI systems.
Rely exclusively on AI-generated assessments of originality, methodological quality, research validity, or publication suitability.
Use AI outputs as the sole basis for allegations of plagiarism, fabricated data, undisclosed AI use, or other misconduct.
Allow AI-generated content to introduce bias, factual errors, inappropriate criticism, or unfair treatment into editorial decisions.

Editorial decisions must be made by authorized human editors based on the manuscript, peer-review reports, journal policies, and relevant evidence.

Editors must protect the independence of peer review and disclose material AI assistance in manuscript evaluation or editorial communications when required by journal policy.

9. AI in Research Involving Human Participants and Sensitive Data

Authors conducting research involving interviews, focus groups, surveys, classroom observations, recordings, workplace communication, student assignments, or other human-participant data must consider the ethical implications of using AI systems to process such materials.

Particular care is required when AI tools process identifiable or potentially identifiable information, confidential communications, unpublished transcripts, voice recordings, student work, workplace documents, or other sensitive data.

Authors must:

Comply with applicable research ethics approvals, informed-consent requirements, institutional policies, and relevant data-protection obligations.
Ensure that the use of AI is consistent with the information provided to participants and the scope of their consent.
Use appropriate safeguards to prevent unauthorized access, disclosure, retention, or reuse of research data.
Avoid entering identifiable, confidential, or sensitive information into AI systems unless the use is authorized and adequate protections are in place.
Evaluate the potential for AI to distort participant meaning, remove contextual information, reproduce stereotypes, or introduce analytical bias.
Report material AI involvement in data processing and analysis transparently.

Where AI is used to transcribe, translate, code, or analyze qualitative data, authors must retain responsibility for checking the relationship between the original data and the reported findings.

AI-generated or simulated data must not be presented as data collected from real participants. If synthetic data are legitimately used as part of a research design, their origin, generation procedure, and analytical role must be explicitly described, and the study must comply with applicable methodological and ethical standards.

10. AI-Generated Content, Copyright, and Intellectual Property

Authors must ensure that AI-assisted content complies with applicable copyright laws, licensing conditions, attribution requirements, and other relevant intellectual property obligations.

The use of AI does not automatically establish that generated text, images, tables, illustrations, or other materials are original, copyright-free, or eligible for unrestricted reuse.

Authors must:

Verify the provenance and permitted use of materials incorporated into the manuscript.
Obtain permissions where required for copyrighted material.
Cite original sources for factual claims, theories, quotations, data, and ideas, rather than treating AI-generated outputs as substitutes for the original sources.
Avoid presenting AI-generated content as a substitute for properly attributed scholarly work.
Ensure that AI-generated visual materials do not reproduce protected content in ways that violate applicable rights.
Comply with any relevant licensing terms associated with AI tools or generated outputs.

Authors must also ensure that the use of AI does not compromise the rights of co-authors, research participants, institutions, employers, or other rights holders.

11. AI Detection and Editorial Assessment

RIAL may use appropriate editorial procedures and available screening tools to assess concerns relating to originality, citation accuracy, research integrity, or compliance with this policy.

However, AI-detection tools can produce false positives and false negatives. Their results must not be treated as conclusive evidence that a manuscript was generated by AI or that misconduct has occurred.

A manuscript must not be rejected solely because an AI detector assigns it a particular score or classification.

Where concerns arise, the editorial team may request clarification, relevant documentation, original data, source materials, methodological details, or an explanation of the AI tools used. Any decision must be based on a fair assessment of the available evidence and the journal's established editorial and ethical procedures.

Authors must cooperate reasonably with requests for clarification relating to the accuracy, originality, provenance, or integrity of their submissions.

12. Undisclosed or Inappropriate AI Use

Failure to disclose AI use when required, or the inappropriate use of AI in research or publication, may result in editorial action.

Depending on the nature, severity, and circumstances of the concern, RIAL may:

Request clarification or a corrected AI-use disclosure.
Require manuscript revisions or additional methodological information.
Request supporting documentation, original data, or evidence of verification.
Suspend the review process while a concern is investigated.
Reject a manuscript where the concerns are serious or cannot be adequately resolved.
Refer a matter to the relevant institution or other appropriate body where warranted and consistent with applicable procedures.
Publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction for an already published article when justified by the evidence and applicable publication ethics standards.

AI use itself does not constitute misconduct. Editorial action will depend on whether the use violates this policy, compromises research integrity, misleads readers, breaches confidentiality, or otherwise undermines the reliability of the scholarly record.

All concerns must be handled fairly, confidentially, and consistently with RIAL's publication ethics policies.

13. AI Use by RIAL in Editorial and Publishing Operations

RIAL may consider the use of AI-assisted technologies to support appropriate administrative, technical, language-editing, accessibility, or production activities.

Any such use must be subject to appropriate human oversight, confidentiality safeguards, data-protection measures, and quality control.

AI must not replace accountable human decision-making in editorial selection, peer review, research-integrity investigations, or publication ethics determinations.

Where AI materially contributes to the preparation or modification of published content, or is used in a manner that could reasonably affect authors' or readers' understanding of the publication process, RIAL will provide appropriate transparency.

The journal will not represent AI-generated or AI-modified content as independently verified when it has not undergone appropriate human review.

14. Author Declaration and Editorial Compliance

By submitting a manuscript to RIAL, authors confirm that:

All AI use subject to disclosure under this policy has been accurately declared.
They have reviewed and verified AI-assisted content, references, data, and analytical outputs relevant to their work.
The manuscript does not contain fabricated data, invented references, unattributed material, or misleading AI-generated content.
They have complied with relevant research ethics, confidentiality, privacy, copyright, and intellectual property requirements.
All listed authors accept responsibility for the submitted work and its published version.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the AI-use disclosure accurately reflects the contributions of all authors and the procedures used in preparing the manuscript.

RIAL reserves the right to seek clarification when the declared use of AI is unclear or when credible concerns arise regarding compliance with this policy.

15. Policy Review and Updates

AI technologies and scholarly publishing practices continue to evolve. RIAL will review this policy periodically and revise it when necessary to reflect developments in research ethics, publication standards, applicable law, and responsible AI use.

Authors, reviewers, editors, and other contributors are expected to consult the current version of this policy and comply with any applicable journal requirements at the time of submission or participation in the editorial process.

16. Guiding Standards

This policy is informed by established principles of publication ethics and responsible AI use in scholarly communication. Where applicable, this policy should be read alongside RIAL's policies on publication ethics, authorship and contributorship, peer review, plagiarism, conflicts of interest, research ethics, corrections, and retractions.

Core principle: AI may assist scholarly work, but it cannot replace human intellectual contribution, critical judgment, research integrity, or accountability.