Publication Ethics and AI Policies

Inornatus Biology Education Journal Publication Ethics are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards:

Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.

 

Originality and Plagiarism:

Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.

 

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications:

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

 

Acknowledgement of Sources:

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

 

Authorship of the Paper:

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

 

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

 

Fundamental Errors in Published Works:

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

 

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects:

The author should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

 

Duties of Editor

Publication Decisions:

Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.

 

Confidentiality:
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

 

Review of Manuscripts:

Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

 

Fair Play:

The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.

 

Confidentiality:

The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.

 

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:

The editor of the Journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest 

Duties of Reviewers

 

Contribution to Editorial Decisions:

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Confidentiality:
Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

 

Acknowledgement of Sources:

Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.

 

Standards of Objectivity:

Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them and, unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work

 

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. 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. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.

 

Promptness:
The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.

 

 

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) POLICIES

Inornatus Biology Education Journal recognizes the significance of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning in scholarly publishing. As generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and others become increasingly accessible, Inornatus Biology Education Journal emphasizes the importance of addressing both their potential advantages and the ethical considerations involved. This policy outlines the journal’s official position on the use of AI tools by authors, reviewers, and editorial staff, ensuring compliance with the standards set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Elsevier, and Taylor & Francis.

 

Use of AI Tools by Authors

Authors are permitted to use AI tools to support the preparation of manuscripts, provided such use is transparent, responsible, and ethical. AI tools may be used for tasks such as language editing, grammar improvement, and reference formatting. However, AI must not be used to generate content that substitutes for original scientific thinking or interpretation of results. Crucially, authors remain solely responsible for the content of their work, including any sections developed with the help of AI tools.

In accordance with the COPE Position Statement (2023), AI tools cannot be listed as authors under any circumstances. Authorship implies the capacity for accountability, consent, and intellectual contribution—criteria which AI tools do not fulfill. Therefore, all named authors must be human individuals who meet established authorship requirements.

 

Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must fully disclose the use of AI tools in their manuscript submissions. This includes, but is not limited to, tools used for text generation, image creation, data analysis, coding assistance, or translation. The disclosure should be placed in the "Declaration of the Use of AI" section of the manuscript and should specify the name of the AI tool, the version used, and the purpose of its application.

For example, authors may include a statement such as:

“The author(s) used OpenAI’s ChatGPT to edit and refine the wording of the Introduction. All outputs were reviewed and verified by the authors.”

or

"During the preparation of this work, the authors used ChatGPT to enhance the clarity of the writing. After using ChatGPT, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and took full responsibility for the publication’s content."

Failure to disclose AI usage may be considered a breach of ethical publishing standards and could result in rejection or retraction of the article.

For authors who did not use any AI tools in the preparation of their work, no disclosure statement is required. Authors may simply omit any reference to AI use in the declaration.

If authors prefer to state this explicitly, they may include an optional statement such as:

“The author(s) affirm that no artificial intelligence (AI) tools were used in the writing, analysis, or preparation of this manuscript.”

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools in figures, images, and artwork

We do not permit the use of Generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or alter images in submitted manuscripts. This may include enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing a specific feature within an image or figure. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Image forensics tools or specialized software might be applied to submitted manuscripts to identify suspected image irregularities.

The only exception is if the use of AI or AI-assisted tools is part of the research design or research methods (such as in AI-assisted imaging approaches to generate or interpret the underlying research data, for example in the field of biomedical imaging). If this is done, such use must be described in a reproducible manner in the methods section. This should include an explanation of how the AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the image creation or alteration process, and the name of the model or tool, version and extension numbers, and manufacturer. Authors should adhere to the AI software’s specific usage policies and ensure correct content attribution. Where applicable, authors could be asked to provide pre-AI-adjusted versions of images and/or the composite raw images used to create the final submitted versions, for editorial assessment.

The use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools in the production of artwork such as for graphical abstracts is not permitted. The use of generative AI in the production of cover art may in some cases be allowed, if the author obtains prior permission from the journal editor and publisher, can demonstrate that all necessary rights have been cleared for the use of the relevant material, and ensures that there is correct content attribution.

Author Responsibility and Accountability

Authors are wholly responsible for the content and integrity of their manuscripts. Even when AI tools are used to assist in writing or other tasks, authors must ensure the accuracy, originality, and appropriateness of the final submission. Authors are expected to verify that AI-generated content does not contain hallucinated references, incorrect scientific claims, biased interpretations, or plagiarized text.

Misuse of AI tools, including submission of entirely or largely AI-generated papers without human oversight or disclosure, will be treated as unethical conduct in accordance with COPE guidelines and Inornatus Biology Education Journal’s editorial policy.

 

Use of AI in Peer Review

Inornatus Biology Education Journal expects all peer reviewers to conduct their evaluations based on confidentiality, integrity, and scholarly competence. Peer reviewers are chosen experts in their fields and should not be using Generative AI for analysis or to summarise submitted articles or portions thereof in the creation of their reviews. The use of manuscripts in Generative AI systems may give rise to risks around confidentiality, infringement of proprietary rights and data and other risks. As such, peer reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts or project proposals, including any associated files, images, or information, into Generative AI tools. 

Reviewers must not use artificial intelligence (AI), including large language model (LLM)–based tools such as ChatGPT, to generate the substantive content of manuscript or proposal review reports. Generative AI may be used solely for non-content purposes, such as improving the grammar, clarity, or language of a review that has been independently written by the reviewer. In doing so, reviewers must ensure that no manuscript content, proposal material, personal data, or other confidential information is uploaded to or shared with any AI system, and any such use must be disclosed to the editor. Reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, integrity, originality, and confidentiality of their reports at all times. The editorial team reserves the right to reject any review produced through inappropriate or undisclosed use of AI tools.

 

Editorial Use of AI

Editorial staff at Inornatus Biology Education Journal may utilize AI tools to support non-decision-making tasks such as plagiarism detection, formatting checks, and language editing. However, AI tools will not be used to make acceptance or rejection decisions. All editorial judgments will be made by qualified human editors to ensure accountability and adherence to ethical standards.