Journal of Chemical Reviews

As the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies grows among content creators, Journal of Chemical Reviews has introduced clear guidelines for their application. These policies are designed to offer better direction for authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and contributors. The journal will keep track of new developments in the field and update its policies as needed. Additionally, the GPTZero detector will be used to assess the manuscript’s content, ensuring it doesn’t overly depend on generative AI and AI-assisted technologies.

For Authors

1. The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in scientific writing

Guidelines for the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in scientific writing focus solely on the manuscript preparation process and do not cover their use in data processing, analysis, or research insights. Authors are encouraged to leverage AI tools to improve the readability, grammar, and structure of their manuscripts, while ensuring that human oversight and editorial judgment remain central. AI-generated content should be carefully reviewed and edited, as it may contain inaccuracies or biases. Authors are ultimately responsible for the content of their manuscripts and must disclose the use of AI technologies to promote transparency with readers, reviewers, and fellow authors.

AI should be used exclusively to improve clarity and language quality, not for generating core content or forming scientific conclusions. Human oversight and editorial control must remain integral to the writing process. The authors bear full responsibility for the content of the manuscript. The use of AI tools, along with their specific purposes, should be clearly disclosed in the submitted manuscript. AI and AI-assisted technologies should never be listed as authors or co-authors. Authors must ensure the originality and integrity of their work and comply with the Ethics in publishing standards. They should also verify that the manuscript does not infringe upon third-party rights or ethical guidelines.

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

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools for creating, altering, or modifying images in submitted manuscripts is prohibited. This includes actions such as enhancing, obscuring, repositioning, removing, or adding elements to images. These restrictions are designed to maintain research transparency and prevent misleading visual representations. However, adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are allowed, provided they do not obscure or distort the original content. Image forensics tools may be employed to detect any irregularities. An exception is made when AI tools are an essential part of the research design or methodology, such as in AI-assisted imaging for biomedical research. Authors must ensure compliance with AI software licensing agreements and properly attribute any third-party or AI-assisted content.

Generative AI and AI-assisted tools are not permitted for image creation or modification within manuscripts. Modifications to brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if they do not alter or conceal original information. The methods section must clearly describe how AI is integrated into the research design or methodology. Proper attribution and adherence to AI software policies are required.  Authors must be prepared to provide raw or pre-AI image data if requested by editors for verification purposes.

For Reviewers

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the journal peer review process

Confidentiality is a critical and non-negotiable responsibility during the manuscript review process. Reviewers must not upload any part of the manuscript to generative AI tools, as doing so may breach confidentiality, violate proprietary rights, and potentially infringe on data privacy regulations. This duty extends to the peer review report, which may also contain sensitive information. Reviewers are advised against using AI tools to alter or enhance the language of their reports. The peer review process relies on human judgment and expertise, and the use of generative AI could introduce inaccuracies or biases. Reviewers are accountable for the content of their evaluations and must ensure that their feedback reflects independent, original analysis.

Journal of Chemical Reviews allows authors to use AI for language and readability improvements before submission, provided such usage is disclosed in a designated section before the references. AI tools employed in this context must adhere to strict confidentiality guidelines and comply with relevant data protection standards and responsible AI principles.

Treat all manuscripts as confidential and privileged. Do not upload any part of the manuscript or your review report to AI tools or third-party applications. Peer review requires human insight—AI should not be used in scientific evaluation. Reviewers are responsible for the accuracy, fairness, and integrity of their evaluations. Authors may use AI for language refinement, with proper disclosure. AI tools used within the editorial workflow must protect data privacy and confidentiality. Avoid using personal AI tools that store, learn from, or retain manuscript content.

For Editors

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the journal editorial process

Submitted manuscripts are confidential and must not be uploaded to generative AI tools by editors, as doing so could violate authors' confidentiality and proprietary rights. If the manuscript includes personally identifiable information or sensitive data, such actions may also infringe on data privacy regulations. This confidentiality extends to all communications related to the manuscript, such as notification and decision letters, which may contain sensitive information. Therefore, editors should refrain from using AI tools for these letters, even for purposes of improving language or readability.

The peer review process is integral to scientific integrity, and the Journal of Chemical Reviews is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards. Editorial evaluations of scientific work require nuanced reasoning and ethical judgment, which cannot be delegated to AI systems. Editorial reviews must be carried out by human editors, as AI and AI-assisted technologies lack the critical thinking and discernment necessary for accurate assessments. These tools may also generate inaccurate or biased conclusions. Editors hold full responsibility for the editorial process, final decisions, and communication with authors. Under the journal's AI author policy, authors may use generative AI and AI-assisted tools to improve language and clarity before submission, provided this usage is disclosed in accordance with the Guide for Authors. The disclosure should be placed in a designated section at the end of the manuscript, just before the references. Editors must remain vigilant for any potential violations of AI policies. If an editor suspects a breach of AI-related policies by an author or reviewer, they are required to notify the publisher.

The Journal of Chemical Reviews is committed to adopting AI technologies that assist reviewers and editors in the editorial workflow while ensuring confidentiality and data privacy for authors, reviewers, and editors alike.

Manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents. Editors must avoid using generative AI tools for manuscripts or related correspondence. Peer review and editorial evaluations should be conducted by human editors, not AI. Authors may use AI for language enhancement, with proper disclosure. The journal utilizes AI technologies for screening and plagiarism checks while ensuring confidentiality. The journal advocates for AI tools that respect confidentiality and data privacy. All editorial AI applications must comply with strict privacy and data security standards.