The editorial board of the Journal of Information and Learning aims to disseminate academic works accurately, with quality and in accordance with ethical publishing standards. Therefore, the journal establishes publishing ethics based on the following roles and responsibilities:

Ethics of Authors

1) Authors must not submit a manuscript that has already been published or under consideration for publishing by other journals. All forms of plagiarism are prohibited.

2) Authors must ensure that the submitted manuscript is entirely an original work with proper referencing.

3) Authors must ensure that the findings presented in the manuscript are derived from a proper study, without data fabrication or falsification. Additionally, the conclusions must be based on empirical findings and not the authors' personal views.

4) All co-authors must have made genuine contributions to the work, including being involved in the research data and decision-making process regarding the submission of the manuscript for publication.

5) Authors must declare any conflicts of interest (if any).

Ethics of Editors

1) The editor must not accept for publication and publish manuscripts that have been previously published in other sources and must not reject articles without thorough examination, especially in areas that may pose problems for manuscript acceptance.

2) The editor needs to check all manuscripts submitted with a software package that is accepted by the general academic standard. If a manuscript contains plagiarized materials, the editor needs to stop the evaluation process and contact the authors immediately for a clarification statement.

3) The editor must screen for quality and select manuscripts for publication in the journal with transparency and equality.

4) The editor shall select reviewers who do not have any conflicts of interest with the manuscript being peer-reviewed for publication. Additionally, they must ensure that the author and reviewer information remains confidential and is not disclosed to unrelated parties during the quality- screening process.

5) The editor must be free from any conflicts of interest with authors or peer reviewers in order to maintain the highest standards of ethical conduct in the editorial process.

6) The editor must appropriately handle authors or manuscripts that engage in unethical or immoral conduct.

7) The editor must not impose publication fees that lack transparency, fairness, and equality for authors.

Ethics of Reviewers

1) Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of the review process. They must not disclose or discuss manuscripts under review with unrelated parties until the manuscript has been published.

2) If the reviewer discovers, upon receiving a manuscript for review, that they have participated in the described research, or for any other reason cannot provide an impartial review, they should promptly inform the editors and decline the review. Conflicts of interest may arise from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the paper under review.

3) Manuscripts should be reviewed objectively in the context of the reviewer's expertise in the field. Personal opinions without backing evidence should not be used as criteria for review decisions.

4) In cases where the reviewer identifies any parts of the article under review that contain statements similar to or duplicated from those of other publications, the reviewer shall promptly notify the editor of such similarity in content.

5) Reviewers must keep the peer review process confidential and complete their reviews within the specified time period.

 

AI Policies

The Journal of Information and Learning (JIL) recognizes the value and potential of using Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools or Large Language Models (LLM) to assist authors in the research and writing process. The use of GenAI in research and academic articles is rapidly expanding. These tools facilitate and expedite the production of work but cannot replace human creativity and critical thinking. Additionally, authors should be aware of plagiarism resulting from the reproduction of text from other sources, the creation of false content, or the misinterpretation of facts or biases inherent in these tools.

The policy on the use of AI technology has been developed to promote transparency and assist authors, reviewers and editors to make ethical decisions regarding the use of such tools. The Journal of Information and Learning (JIL) will monitor and update the policy to align with and adapt to technological advancements.

Authors

Authors are accountable for the accuracy and completeness of their work through proper review and editing before final submission. Authors must ensure that the manuscript is original and that they qualify for authorship. The work must not infringe on the rights of others, and authors should familiarize themselves with the journal's publication ethics policy before submitting their work.

JIL does not permit the inclusion of GenAI as an author of manuscripts. AI tools do not meet the criteria or requirements for authorship, as they cannot take responsibility for the submitted work. As non-legal entities, they cannot assert the presence or absence of conflicts of interest nor manage copyright and license agreements.

Authors are not permitted to use GenAI tools to write any part of the manuscript, including the abstract and literature review.

Authors are not permitted to use GenAI or AI-assisted tools to create or alter images and figures in submitted manuscripts. This may include enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing a specific feature within an image or figure. GenAI image creation has resulted in novel legal copyright and research integrity issues.

The in-text reporting of statistics and results using a GenAI tool/LLM is not permissible. Authors must be responsible for the creation and interpretation of their work and accountable for its accuracy, integrity, and validity.

Authors may use a GenAI tool/LLM to improve the language and readability of their work, ensuring that the text is free of grammatical, spelling, punctuation, and stylistic errors. These AI-assisted improvements may include rephrasing and formatting changes to the texts, but do not include the automatic generation of content in any case. The improvements must be made to content created by the authors, not entirely new content generated by AI tools.

The only exception is if the use of GenAI is part of the research design or research methods. In such cases, the use must be described in a reproducible manner.

This includes providing information about the use of the AI tool in the Methodology section or the Declaration of GenAI, as appropriate. Authors should specify the name and version of the tool, as well as the reasons for using it, in a detailed and transparent manner.

If the Editor becomes aware that GenAI has been inappropriately used, such as generating incorrect text or content, plagiarism, or improper attribution to prior sources, in the preparation of a submission without disclosure, the Editor reserves the right to reject the submission at any time during the publishing process. The Editor’s decision is final.

Reviewers

Reviewers should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into GenAI tools as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and the copyright of the manuscript under review. Additionally, these tools pose a risk of generating incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions.

Peer reviewers play a vital role in the publication of academic work. Their evaluations and recommendations guide editors’ decisions to ensure that published work is valid, rigorous, and credible. Editors select peer reviewers primarily based on their expertise, with in-depth knowledge and understanding of the subject or methods of the work under review. This expertise is invaluable and cannot be replaced by GenAI. Peer reviewers are accountable for the accuracy and perspectives expressed in their reports, and the peer review process operates on the principle of mutual trust between authors, reviewers and editors.

Editors

Editors should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into GenAI tools as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and the copyright of the manuscript under review. Additionally, these tools pose a risk of generating incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions.

Managing the editorial evaluation of a manuscript involves responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. GenAI tools should not be used by editors to assist in the evaluation or decision-making process of a manuscript as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for this work are beyond the capabilities of this technology. The editor is responsible and accountable for the editorial process, the final decision and the communication there of to the authors.