Artificial Intelligence and Automated Tools Policy

General Principle

The Dyal Singh Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (DSJHSS) permits responsible use of digital and automated tools where they support, rather than replace, human scholarly judgment and accountability.

Human authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, citations, arguments, data, analysis, ethical compliance and final wording of submitted work.

Use by Authors

Routine tools used for spelling, grammar, formatting, reference management or straightforward language correction do not normally require a special AI declaration.

Authors must disclose meaningful use of generative artificial intelligence or similar systems beyond straightforward language correction, editing or formatting. Relevant use may include generation or substantial transformation of text, summaries, translations, analytical material, coding, images or other content that contributed materially to the manuscript.

Where disclosure is required, authors should state the nature and purpose of the tool use in a transparent manner appropriate to the manuscript.

Scholarly Responsibility

Authors must independently verify all tool-assisted output. Generative AI may produce inaccurate facts, invented references, biased statements, distorted quotations or misleading interpretations. Responsibility for such errors remains with the human authors.

AI output must not be used to fabricate sources, evidence, quotations, participants, data or findings.

Authorship and Citation

Artificial-intelligence systems and automated tools cannot be named as authors because they cannot take responsibility for a scholarly work, approve publication, disclose conflicts or respond to ethical concerns.

Generative AI should not be cited as an authoritative scholarly source in place of the original literature or evidence on which a claim depends. Authors should cite the underlying human-authored or primary sources.

Confidentiality in Peer Review

Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential manuscripts, review reports or unpublished author information into publicly accessible generative-AI systems or other tools where confidentiality, data control or reuse cannot be assured.

Reviewers and editors should not use generative AI to create substantive peer-review assessments or editorial decisions. Limited language editing of a review may be acceptable only where confidentiality is protected and the human reviewer remains fully responsible for the content.

Journal Use of Automated Tools

DSJHSS may use established automated tools for functions such as textual-similarity screening, metadata processing or technical checks. Automated results are not treated as final findings. An editor or other responsible person must review outputs that could affect an integrity or editorial decision.

Undisclosed or Improper Use

Where AI use appears to have resulted in fabricated citations, false information, plagiarism, compromised confidentiality or other integrity concerns, the journal may request an explanation, require correction, reject the manuscript or take post-publication action under its publication-ethics policies.