Journal of Library and Information Science Research (JLISR, ISSN: 2218-3388), published semiannually by the Library Association of the Republic of China (Taiwan), is a leading journal for double blind peer-reviewed research in library and information science in Taiwan. JLISR is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles based on the Code of Conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and aim to adhere to its Best Practice Guidelines. Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Duties of Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Duties of Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Duties of Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Generative AI Usage Guidelines for the Journal of Library and Information Science Research (JLISR)
Generative AI has been widely used by researchers at various stages of research. JLISR’s position is that generative AI is a collaborative tool and does not yet possess the identity of an author. While AI can assist in the research and writing process, it cannot be held accountable for the content. Therefore, authors submitting to this journal and invited reviewers must be responsible for their own work and reviews, and should truthfully disclose any use of AI tools during the research or review process.
Policy Structure:
- Section I: General Principles
- Section II: Guidelines for Authors
- Section III: Guidelines for Reviewers
- Section IV: Guidelines for Editors
- Section V: Disclaimer Statement
I. General Principles: Accountability and Authorship
Human Accountability: Generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship requires legal standing and the ability to take public responsibility for the work, which AI lacks. Human authors remain solely responsible and accountable for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of their work, including any content generated or assisted by AI. Authors must ensure the manuscript is free from
II. For Authors
- Authorship and Accountability
- Ultimate Responsibility: Generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship requires legal standing and the ability to take responsibility for the work, which AI lacks. Human authors are fully accountable for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of their work. This includes verifying AI-generated output to prevent plagiarism, fabrication, or bias.
- Permitted and Prohibited Uses
- Permitted use: Authors can use AI to check formatting, improve language or grammar, or enhance readability. Human authors should exercise the final judgment regarding the AI-generated content. If the study includes images or media used as research analysis data (e.g. heatmaps), they must not be modified or altered using AI to serve as research evidence.
- Disclosure and Transparency
- Mandatory Disclosure: Any use of Gen AI (except basic grammar checks) must be transparently disclosed. The use of AI must be disclosed. If AI has a significant impact on research design or data analysis, it must be described in detail in the Methods section.
- Documentation: Authors should provide detailed information about the AI used, including its name, version, and purpose. Please use the following AIxCRediT architecture in the disclaimer to describe the extent of AI's involvement in the research writing process:
- L0 – Pure human work: No AI assistance.
- L1 – Refining: Use AI tools to proofread or check typos, spelling, and grammar or to improve tone, style, and readability.
- L2 – Generating: Use AI tools to generate substantial content (e.g., title, abstracts, and paragraphs) based on prompts.
- L3 – Analyzing: AI tools are involved in core research tasks, such as statistical data analysis, logical testing, or pattern recognition.
- Citations: AI-generated content must be cited according to APA style.
III. For Reviewers
- Confidentiality and Proprietary Rights
- No AI Uploads: Reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading submitted manuscripts or any parts thereof into generative AI tools. This is essential to protect authors’ confidentiality, proprietary rights, and data privacy.
- Integrity of Assessment
- Human Judgment: Peer review requires expert human evaluation that AI cannot replicate. AI must not be used to assist in the scientific assessment of a paper, as it may generate biased or incorrect conclusions.
- Permitted Assistance and Disclosure
- Language Support: Reviewers may use AI to improve the English readability of their review comments.
- Disclosure: If any part of the evaluation was supported by AI, it must be transparently declared in the review report.
IV. For Editors
- Confidentiality and Correspondence
- Communication Privacy: Editors must not upload manuscripts or decision letters into AI tools, as these documents contain confidential information about the research and its authors.
- Decision-Making
- Human Oversight: The responsibility for the editorial process and final decision remains entirely with the human editor. AI tools should not be used to replace the critical thinking required for editorial evaluation.
- Use of Internal Screening Tools
- Permitted Technical Support: Editors may use secure, in-house AI tools (that respect confidentiality) for technical tasks such as identifying reviewers, checking for plagiarism, or matching the scope of submissions.
- Enforcement of Policy
- Monitoring Integrity: Editors are responsible for ensuring authors and reviewers comply with the journal's Gen AI policy. Editors have the right to reject manuscripts if they have concerns about the validity or quality of AI-assisted content.
V. Disclaimer Statement
During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [NAME TOOL / SERVICE] for [SPECIFIC REASON]. Following the use of this tool, the author(s) meticulously reviewed, verified, and edited the generated content. The author(s) assume full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the publication.
Policy Review
Given the rapid evolution of AI technologies, JLISR will periodically review and update this policy to reflect emerging best practices and international ethical standards