Generative AI Policy

Jurnal Moderasi: The Journal of Ushuluddin, Islamic Thought, and Muslim Societies
Faculty of Ushuluddin and Islamic Thought, Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta

1. Purpose

Jurnal Moderasi recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted tools may support certain aspects of scholarly research and writing. This policy establishes principles for the responsible use of such tools by authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff while safeguarding scholarly integrity, confidentiality, source accuracy, originality, and human accountability.

The journal treats AI as an assistive tool, not as a scholarly authority. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies, fabricated references, bias, or misleading interpretations. Such risks are particularly significant in research involving religious texts, historical sources, cultural practices, and lived religious experiences. Human researchers remain responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and scholarly quality of their work.

2. General Principles

Authors retain full responsibility for the content of their manuscripts, including arguments, citations, translations, transliterations, interpretations, data, analyses, and conclusions. AI tools may support specific research and writing tasks but must not replace scholarly judgment, independent analysis, or critical engagement with primary and secondary sources.

AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship is reserved for human contributors who can approve the final manuscript, accept responsibility for their contributions, respond to editorial inquiries, and uphold the journal’s publication ethics requirements.

The use of AI must be transparent, proportionate to the task, and consistent with academic integrity, research ethics, data protection, and applicable confidentiality requirements.

3. Permitted Uses by Authors

Authors may use AI tools for limited assistance, including:

  • Improving grammar, spelling, readability, and language clarity.

  • Organizing research notes and supporting transcription.

  • Assisting with preliminary translation, transliteration, or summarization.

  • Supporting coding, data organization, and the preparation of tables or figures.

  • Assisting with other technical tasks that do not replace the author's scholarly judgment.

All AI-assisted output must be critically reviewed and verified by the authors before submission. Authors must independently check factual claims, references, quotations, translations, data, and interpretations against reliable sources.

Routine use of spelling checkers, conventional grammar correction, reference managers, and formatting software does not require disclosure unless these tools generate or substantially transform scholarly content.

4. Unacceptable Uses

Authors must not use AI tools to:

  • Fabricate or falsify references, quotations, hadith citations, manuscript shelfmarks, archival records, interview data, field notes, research findings, or other evidence.

  • Generate misleading data, images, figures, or research results and present them as authentic.

  • Conceal plagiarism, misrepresent sources, or present AI-generated material as independently verified scholarship.

  • Produce substantive arguments, interpretations, or conclusions without critical human assessment and verification.

  • Generate literature reviews based on sources that the authors have not consulted or adequately verified.

  • Violate confidentiality, research ethics, copyright, privacy, or the rights of research participants through the use of AI tools.

Authors must exercise particular care when using AI for research involving Qur'anic and hadith texts, classical commentaries, religious manuscripts, isnad analysis, historical documents, and specialized terminology. The same standard applies to research on religious minorities, indigenous spiritual traditions, gender, digital religion, and contemporary Muslim societies.

AI-assisted translation, transcription, or transliteration may be used as preliminary support but must be checked against the original material. AI output must not be treated as authoritative evidence for interpreting religious texts, establishing historical facts, or representing the views and experiences of research participants.

5. Disclosure Requirements

Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools that contributes to the development or presentation of the manuscript, including the generation or substantial rewriting of text, summarization, translation, coding, data analysis, or the creation of figures and tables.

The disclosure should identify the tool or service used, its purpose, and the relevant stage of the research or manuscript preparation. Authors must also confirm that they have reviewed and verified the output and accept responsibility for the final content.

A suitable disclosure statement is:

“During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [name of tool/service] for [specific purpose]. The author(s) critically reviewed, verified, and edited the AI-assisted output and take full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and final content of the manuscript.”

If no disclosure is required under the provisions above, authors are not expected to provide a statement merely to report routine spelling or formatting assistance.

6. Responsibilities of Reviewers and Editors

Reviewers, editors, and editorial staff must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, peer-review reports, editorial correspondence, unpublished data, and author information.

Such materials must not be uploaded to public or third-party AI systems unless the journal has explicitly authorized the use of an appropriate tool and adequate safeguards are in place to protect confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property, and reviewer anonymity.

Reviewers must not delegate their expert evaluation to AI tools or submit AI-generated assessments as a substitute for their own independent judgment. Editors remain responsible for editorial decisions and must ensure that any authorized use of AI in editorial workflows does not compromise fairness, confidentiality, or editorial independence.

7. Suspected Misuse and Editorial Actions

If the journal has reasonable grounds to suspect undisclosed or improper AI use, the editorial office may request clarification or supporting information from the authors. Each case will be assessed individually, taking into account the nature of the suspected misuse, the available evidence, and the journal’s publication ethics policies.

Depending on the findings, possible actions include requesting clarification, requiring revision or disclosure, rejecting a manuscript, publishing a correction, or conducting a further investigation into possible research or publication misconduct.

AI-detection tools, automated scores, or stylistic indicators alone will not be treated as conclusive evidence of misconduct. Editorial actions must be based on an assessment of the relevant evidence and the circumstances of the case.

Questions regarding this policy should be directed to:

Editorial Office
Jurnal Moderasi: The Journal of Ushuluddin, Islamic Thought, and Muslim Societies
Faculty of Ushuluddin and Islamic Thought
Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Email: jurnalmoderasi@uin-suka.ac.id

Approved by: Editorial Board of Jurnal Moderasi: The Journal of Ushuluddin, Islamic Thought, and Muslim Societies

Last updated: 10 October 2026