Generative AI Policy

Dinamika Penelitian: Media Komunikasi Penelitian Sosial Keagamaan recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools and large language models offer new opportunities for supporting scholarly communication while also creating risks for research integrity, transparency, confidentiality, authorship, and accountability. Drawing upon the STM Association’s 2023 White Paper on Generative AI in Scholarly Communications and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Position Statement on Authorship and AI Tools, Dinamika Penelitian establishes this policy to guide the responsible use of GenAI in manuscript preparation, peer review, editorial decision-making, and post-publication activities.

This policy is intended to ensure that the benefits of AI, such as language polishing, formatting support, reference checking, translation assistance, and research organization, are used in ways that preserve scholarly rigor, ethical responsibility, intellectual ownership, participant protection, and the integrity of socio-religious and community-based research.

Acceptable AI Use and Author Responsibilities

Authors may use GenAI tools for limited technical and linguistic support, such as grammar correction, spelling improvement, style consistency, formatting assistance, and reference organization. Such use does not require detailed disclosure when it does not alter the manuscript’s intellectual content, research design, data analysis, interpretation, argumentation, or scholarly contribution.

However, any substantive use of GenAI must be clearly disclosed. This includes the use of AI tools to generate or revise substantial text, synthesize literature, translate research materials, assist coding or data analysis, create figures or illustrations, summarize field data, develop research instruments, or influence the conceptual structure of the manuscript. The disclosure should identify the AI tool, version where available, provider, purpose of use, and the extent of human review and verification.

GenAI tools must not be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for scholarly claims, approve the final manuscript, disclose conflicts of interest, provide consent, or be accountable for research integrity. Responsibility for all submitted content, whether human-written or AI-assisted, remains entirely with the human authors. Authors must verify the accuracy, originality, citation, ethical compliance, and scholarly validity of all AI-assisted content.

Authors must not use GenAI to fabricate data, participants, interviews, field notes, observations, quotations, religious texts, community narratives, references, ethical approval, informed consent, or research findings. AI must not be used to conceal plagiarism, manipulate citations, misrepresent fieldwork, or replace essential scholarly judgment.

AI Use in Socio-Religious and Community-Based Research

Because Dinamika Penelitian publishes research on Islam, Muslim societies, socio-religious life, community development, community empowerment, ethnography, digital communities, and field-based research, authors must exercise particular care when using AI tools with sensitive data.

Authors must not upload confidential or identifiable research data to public AI platforms. This includes interview transcripts, field notes, participant identities, photographs, voices, family information, institutional records, community documents, religious community data, digital trace data, or information concerning vulnerable groups, minority communities, community conflicts, or sensitive socio-religious practices.

When AI is used to assist with translation, coding, summarization, or organization of qualitative data, authors remain responsible for ensuring that meanings, contexts, religious expressions, cultural nuances, and participant voices are not distorted. AI-assisted interpretation must be checked carefully by the authors and must not replace contextual, ethical, and scholarly analysis.

Disclosure of AI Use

Substantive AI use must be disclosed in the manuscript, preferably in a dedicated statement before the References section or in the Method or Acknowledgments section where appropriate.

A disclosure statement should include:

The authors used [name of AI tool, version if available] for [specific purpose]. All AI-assisted content was reviewed, verified, and revised by the authors. The authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, interpretation, and integrity of the manuscript.

If no substantive AI tool was used, authors may state:

The authors did not use generative AI tools in the preparation of this manuscript.

Failure to disclose substantive AI use may be treated as a publication-ethics concern and may lead to editorial investigation, revision request, rejection, correction, expression of concern, or retraction, depending on the seriousness of the case.

Editorial and Peer Review Protocols

Editors and reviewers must protect manuscript confidentiality throughout the editorial and peer-review process. Unpublished manuscripts, reviewer reports, author responses, research data, field notes, interview excerpts, and supplementary materials must not be uploaded to public GenAI platforms or external AI services that do not guarantee confidentiality, intellectual property protection, and data security.

Dinamika Penelitian prohibits the use of public GenAI platforms for automated editorial decision-making, confidential manuscript assessment, plagiarism detection, or reviewer replacement. AI tools may assist editors with administrative or technical tasks only when confidentiality, data protection, and human oversight are ensured.

All editorial decisions must be made by human editors. AI outputs may support administrative efficiency, but they must not replace editorial expertise, reviewer judgment, ethical assessment, or final decision-making.

Reviewers must not use GenAI tools to draft review reports by uploading confidential manuscripts to public platforms. Reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, fairness, confidentiality, and scholarly quality of their review reports. If reviewers suspect undisclosed or inappropriate AI use, they should report the concern confidentially to the handling editor.

Scholarly Transparency and Reader Responsibility

Dinamika Penelitian supports transparency in scholarly communication. Published articles that include substantive AI-assisted contributions should contain a clear disclosure statement so that readers can understand the role of AI in the research and writing process.

Readers should also respect intellectual property and confidentiality. They should not upload full-text articles, unpublished materials, sensitive data, or identifiable research content to public AI platforms in ways that violate copyright, privacy, participant consent, or data protection principles.

Misuse of AI and Editorial Actions

Inappropriate AI use may include undisclosed substantive AI assistance, fabricated references, false quotations, invented data, manipulated findings, inaccurate translation of participant voices, AI-generated images without disclosure, plagiarism masked through paraphrasing tools, or the use of AI to create misleading scholarly claims.

When suspected AI misuse is identified, the journal may request clarification, original data, research instruments, field documentation, AI-use disclosure, or other supporting evidence. Depending on the severity of the issue, the journal may require revision, reject the manuscript, publish a correction, issue an expression of concern, retract the article, or take other actions in accordance with the journal’s Publication Ethics and Research Integrity Policy.

Policy Review

Because GenAI technologies and scholarly publishing standards continue to evolve, Dinamika Penelitian will review and update this policy periodically or whenever significant technological, ethical, legal, or editorial developments occur.

Through this policy, Dinamika Penelitian affirms its commitment to responsible innovation, transparency, accountability, participant protection, community responsibility, and scholarly excellence in socio-religious and community-based research.