Generative AI (GenAI) Policy

ARISTHA: Ar-Risalah Journal of Islamic Tourism and Hospitality

Publisher: Sekolah Tinggi Agama Islam (STAI) Ar-Risalah Sumatera Barat, Indonesia

1. Purpose and Scope

ARISTHA: Ar-Risalah Journal of Islamic Tourism and Hospitality recognizes the increasing use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and AI-assisted technologies in scholarly research, academic writing, editorial management, and scientific communication.

The journal supports the responsible, transparent, ethical, and accountable use of such technologies while safeguarding research integrity, intellectual originality, authorship responsibility, confidentiality, and the reliability of published scholarly knowledge.

This policy applies to authors, editors, peer reviewers, and other individuals involved in the preparation, submission, evaluation, and publication of manuscripts in ARISTHA.

It covers the use of generative AI tools, including large language models, AI-assisted writing systems, image-generation technologies, automated coding assistants, and related applications capable of generating or substantially transforming scholarly content.

The policy is informed by internationally recognized principles of publication ethics and responsible scholarly communication, including relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and other established scholarly publishing organizations. Reference to these standards does not imply organizational membership or endorsement.

2. General Principles of Responsible AI Use

ARISTHA permits the responsible use of AI-assisted technologies when such use does not compromise scholarly integrity, transparency, or accountability.

The following principles apply:

Human authors remain fully responsible for the content, accuracy, originality, and integrity of submitted manuscripts.
AI-generated material must be critically evaluated and independently verified before inclusion in scholarly work.
The use of AI must not misrepresent the research process, methods, data, findings, or intellectual contributions.
Substantive use of generative AI must be disclosed transparently.
AI tools must not be identified as authors or co-authors.
Confidential information and personal data must be protected.
AI use must comply with applicable copyright, licensing, ethical, and legal requirements.
Editorial and peer-review decisions must remain under meaningful human responsibility and oversight.

The journal distinguishes between appropriate technological assistance and unacceptable substitution of human scholarly judgment.

3. Permitted Uses of Generative AI by Authors

Authors may use generative AI or AI-assisted tools for legitimate supporting activities, provided that the resulting content is carefully reviewed, verified, and appropriately disclosed when required.

Potentially acceptable uses include:

Improving grammar, spelling, clarity, readability, and academic language.
Assisting with translation or language refinement.
Supporting preliminary brainstorming and research planning.
Helping organize manuscript outlines or draft structures.
Assisting with programming, coding, or technical tasks, subject to verification.
Supporting literature discovery or information organization, provided that all sources are independently checked.
Assisting with the preparation of non-evidentiary illustrative materials, where permitted and transparently identified.

AI assistance does not remove the author's obligation to demonstrate independent scholarly reasoning and substantive intellectual contribution.

The acceptability of a particular use depends on its purpose, extent, transparency, and implications for research integrity.

4. Prohibited and Unacceptable Uses

ARISTHA does not permit AI use that undermines the authenticity, reliability, or ethical standing of scholarly work.

Unacceptable practices include:

Fabricating research data, survey responses, interviews, observations, or experimental findings.
Generating fictitious references, quotations, legal provisions, or bibliographic information and presenting them as genuine.
Inventing research procedures, ethical approvals, participant consent, or fieldwork activities.
Presenting AI-generated interpretations or conclusions without appropriate scholarly verification.
Using AI to conceal plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other forms of research misconduct.
Manipulating images, figures, or data representations in a misleading manner.
Submitting AI-generated content that the authors have not critically examined and accepted responsibility for.
Using AI to impersonate authors, reviewers, editors, or research participants.
Uploading confidential or sensitive research information to external AI services without appropriate authorization and safeguards.

AI-generated output must not be treated as independently verified scientific evidence.

5. Authorship and Human Accountability

Generative AI systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to ARISTHA.

Authorship requires intellectual responsibility, approval of the final manuscript, accountability for scholarly claims, and the ability to respond to questions concerning research integrity.

AI systems cannot independently fulfill these responsibilities.

All listed human authors must accept responsibility for the submitted work, including material produced or modified with AI assistance.

Authors must ensure that AI-generated or AI-assisted content does not introduce factual inaccuracies, unsupported statements, misleading interpretations, discriminatory assumptions, or fabricated citations.

6. Disclosure of Generative AI Use

Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI during research or manuscript preparation.

A disclosure should identify:

The name of the AI tool or system used.
The purpose for which the tool was used.
The stage of research or manuscript preparation in which it was applied.
The nature and extent of the AI-generated or AI-assisted contribution.
The steps taken by the authors to verify and take responsibility for the resulting content.

Routine spelling correction and basic grammar assistance that do not materially generate or alter scholarly content do not ordinarily require a separate declaration.

However, AI-assisted generation or substantial rewriting of manuscript text, research interpretation, code, images, or analytical content must be disclosed.

The disclosure should be included in an appropriate section of the manuscript, such as a dedicated Declaration of Generative AI Use, or in another location specified by the journal.

7. Suggested AI Disclosure Statement

When generative AI has been used substantively, authors may adapt the following statement:

Declaration of Generative AI Use

"During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name and version of AI tool, if known] for [specific purpose]. All AI-assisted outputs were critically reviewed, verified, and revised by the authors. The authors take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, interpretation, and integrity of the manuscript."

Authors who have not used generative AI in a manner requiring disclosure may state:

"The authors declare that no generative AI tools were used to generate substantive scholarly content in the preparation of this manuscript."

These statements should accurately reflect actual practice and must not be used to conceal material AI involvement.

8. AI-Assisted Literature Review and Referencing

Authors may use AI-assisted tools to help identify research topics, organize information, or discover potentially relevant literature.

However, all references must be independently verified against authentic scholarly sources.

Authors must ensure that:

Cited publications actually exist.
Bibliographic details are accurate.
The cited sources support the claims attributed to them.
Quotations and page references are authentic.
The interpretation of prior research is not based solely on AI-generated summaries.

Fabricated citations, misleading source descriptions, and unsupported claims are unacceptable.

AI-generated text must not replace critical engagement with the original scholarly literature.

9. AI Use in Research Methods and Data Analysis

When AI tools form part of the research methodology, their use must be described with sufficient transparency to support scholarly evaluation.

Relevant information may include:

The AI system or model employed.
Its role in data collection, classification, coding, analysis, or interpretation.
The procedures used to validate AI-generated outputs.
The extent of human oversight.
Relevant methodological limitations and risks of bias.

Where AI use materially affects the research design or findings, disclosure should appear in the methodology section rather than only in a general acknowledgment.

Authors remain responsible for the reliability and interpretation of research results.

10. AI-Generated Images, Figures, and Visual Materials

AI-generated or AI-modified visual materials must not misrepresent empirical observations, research evidence, participants, or documented events.

Authors must disclose substantive AI generation or alteration of images and figures.

Illustrative AI-generated graphics may be considered when they are relevant, clearly identified, and consistent with the journal's requirements.

Images presented as research evidence must preserve the authenticity and integrity of the underlying observations or data.

AI-generated photographs or fabricated visual representations must not be presented as genuine documentation of tourism destinations, hospitality facilities, religious practices, field observations, or research participants.

Authors must comply with applicable copyright, licensing, consent, and privacy requirements.

11. AI Use in Qualitative Research

Research involving interviews, observations, focus group discussions, or other qualitative methods requires particular attention to confidentiality, contextual accuracy, and interpretive responsibility.

AI-assisted transcription, coding, translation, thematic organization, or analysis may be used when ethically and methodologically appropriate.

Authors must:

Protect participant confidentiality and personal information.
Obtain required permissions or consent where applicable.
Verify AI-assisted transcription and translation accuracy.
Explain the role of AI in the analytical process.
Retain human responsibility for interpretation and conclusions.
Avoid generating fictitious participant statements, quotations, or themes.

The use of AI must not obscure the distinction between authentic empirical data and machine-generated content.

12. AI Use in Islamic Tourism and Hospitality Research

ARISTHA recognizes that research in Islamic tourism, halal tourism, religious tourism, hospitality, and sharia-related fields may involve culturally, legally, and religiously sensitive information.

Authors using AI-assisted technologies must exercise particular care when handling:

Interpretations of Islamic legal principles and religious texts.
Halal certification requirements and regulatory information.
Religious tourism practices and pilgrimage-related experiences.
Cultural identities and community-based tourism contexts.
Hospitality service standards involving religious considerations.
Sensitive interviews or observations involving religious institutions and communities.

AI-generated interpretations of religious texts, legal provisions, fatwas, or regulatory requirements must be verified against authoritative and relevant primary sources.

Authors must not treat AI-generated religious or legal explanations as authoritative without appropriate scholarly examination.

13. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for maintaining independent scholarly judgment when evaluating manuscripts involving AI-assisted content.

Editors should:

Evaluate manuscripts on academic merit, originality, methodological rigor, and ethical compliance.
Consider whether material AI use has been appropriately disclosed.
Seek clarification when AI-generated material raises credible concerns about accuracy or research integrity.
Avoid relying exclusively on automated AI detection tools when assessing potential misconduct.
Protect confidential manuscript information.
Apply the journal's publication ethics policies consistently and fairly.

AI detection results, where used, should be treated as potentially fallible indicators rather than conclusive evidence of misconduct.

Final editorial decisions must remain under human editorial responsibility.

14. Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers must preserve the confidentiality of manuscripts and maintain independent professional judgment.

Reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts, confidential research materials, or review reports to external generative AI platforms without appropriate authorization and safeguards.

Reviewers should not delegate their substantive scholarly evaluation to AI systems.

Where AI-assisted tools are permitted for limited supporting tasks, reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, fairness, and confidentiality of their assessments.

Any suspected misuse of AI affecting research integrity should be reported to the editor with a clear explanation and relevant supporting evidence.

15. Confidentiality, Privacy, and Data Protection

Authors, editors, and reviewers must exercise appropriate care when entering information into AI systems.

Confidential materials may include unpublished manuscripts, peer-review reports, participant data, institutional records, commercially sensitive information, and identifiable personal information.

The use of external AI services must comply with applicable privacy obligations, research ethics approvals, consent conditions, contractual restrictions, and institutional policies.

Sensitive or confidential materials must not be transferred to external AI services without an appropriate legal and ethical basis and adequate safeguards.

16. Copyright and Intellectual Property

Authors are responsible for ensuring that AI-assisted content complies with applicable intellectual property rights and licensing conditions.

The use of generative AI does not automatically establish ownership, originality, or permission to reproduce third-party material.

Authors must verify that manuscript text, images, tables, software, and other materials do not infringe the rights of others.

Appropriate attribution, permissions, and disclosures must be provided where required.

17. Assessment of Suspected AI Misuse

When credible concerns arise about inappropriate AI use, the editorial team may request clarification or supporting documentation.

Potential concerns include fabricated citations, invented research data, misleading visual evidence, undisclosed substantive AI generation, or breaches of confidentiality.

The journal should assess such concerns fairly, proportionately, and on the basis of available evidence.

Authors should ordinarily have an opportunity to respond before consequential editorial decisions are made.

Cases involving suspected misconduct must be handled consistently with the journal's Publication Ethics and Allegation of Misconduct policies.

18. Editorial Actions and Consequences

When inappropriate AI use is substantiated, ARISTHA may take proportionate editorial action according to the nature and seriousness of the concern.

Possible actions include:

Requesting clarification or additional disclosure.
Requiring corrections or revisions.
Declining a manuscript before publication.
Publishing a correction or expression of concern.
Retracting a published article when justified.
Referring serious ethical concerns to an appropriate institution or authority.

The presence of AI-assisted content alone does not automatically constitute misconduct. Decisions should consider the actual use, disclosure, accuracy, and impact on research integrity.

19. Relationship with Other Editorial Policies

This policy should be read together with the journal's:

Editorial Decision Policy.
Publication Ethics.
Allegation of Misconduct.
Peer Review Process.
Plagiarism Policy.
Retraction and Correction Policy.
Copyright and License Policy.

Where a concern involves multiple ethical issues, the relevant policies should be applied consistently.

20. Policy Review and Updates

ARISTHA recognizes that generative AI technologies and scholarly publishing standards continue to evolve.

The journal may periodically review this policy to reflect developments in AI capabilities, research integrity guidance, legal requirements, data protection practices, and responsible academic publishing.

Authors, editors, and reviewers are expected to comply with the applicable provisions of this policy.

Policy Position: Responsible and transparent use of generative AI is permitted, subject to human accountability, appropriate disclosure, independent verification, confidentiality, and research integrity.

AI Authorship: Not permitted.

Substantive AI Use Disclosure: Required.

Final Scholarly and Editorial Responsibility: Human authors and editors.