AI Policy

 

ANNOUNCEMENT

Journal of Management Science, Sakon Nakhon Rajabhat University

Subject: Generative Artificial Intelligence Policy (2nd Revision)

Whereas it is appropriate to establish a policy and guidelines governing the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in the academic publication process of the Journal of Management Science, Sakon Nakhon Rajabhat University, in order to preserve credibility, academic integrity, and transparency in the scholarly community, in accordance with the standards of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the ICMJE Recommendations (2026 revision), the STM Classification of AI Use in Academic Manuscript Preparation, and the quality-assessment criteria of the Thai Journal Citation Index (TCI) — 5th Round;

By virtue of the resolution of the Editorial Board of the Journal of Management Science, Sakon Nakhon Rajabhat University, Meeting No. 2/2026, held on 28 September 2026, the Editorial Board hereby issues this announcement establishing the Generative Artificial Intelligence Policy as follows:

Chapter 1  Definitions and General Principles

 Article 1  In this Announcement —

"Generative Artificial Intelligence" or "Generative AI" means artificial-intelligence technology capable of automatically generating content, text, program code, or media of various kinds, including but not limited to ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and systems of a similar nature.

"Author" means a person who submits a manuscript for consideration and publication in the journal.

"Peer Reviewer" or "Reviewer" means an expert appointed by the journal to evaluate the quality of manuscripts.

"Editorial Board" means the body of persons responsible for the operations and publication decisions of the journal.

Article 2  This Policy is founded on four shared principles in accordance with the Springer Nature Standard (2026):

(1)  Human Accountability — human beings bear full responsibility for all content.

(2)  Transparency — the use of AI must be disclosed in every case specified herein.

(3)  Human Oversight — a human being must review and make every final decision.

(4)  Confidentiality — no information forming part of the publication process may be disclosed to public AI systems.

Article 3  This Announcement shall apply to all article types submitted to the system from 1 January 2027 onwards. Articles submitted prior to that date shall be governed by the policy in force on the date of submission.

Chapter 2  Guidelines for Authors (Pillar 1)

 Article 4  Authors are bound to observe the following principles:

(1)  AI shall not be named as an author or co-author, as AI cannot be held accountable for the accuracy of content, has no legal standing, and cannot give consent to publication.

(2)  Authors bear full responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, and reliability of all content in the manuscript. Use of AI does not reduce or transfer that responsibility.

(3)  Uploading respondents' personal data, unpublished manuscripts, or data subject to a confidentiality agreement onto a public AI system, which may constitute a violation of the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019), is prohibited.

(4)  Authors must verify the actual existence of every reference cited; citing works fabricated by AI that do not exist is prohibited.

Article 5  Use of AI is classified into three levels as follows:

Level 1 — Permitted Use (Green)

(1)  Grammar and spelling checks, where the author has drafted the content personally.

(2)  Language polishing.

(3)  Translation assistance, provided the author verifies and confirms accuracy against the original source.

(4)  Formatting reference lists from real sources that the author has read.

(5)  Assistance writing programme code for data analysis, provided the researcher verifies and understands the entire process.

Level 2 — Permitted with Disclosure and Caution (Yellow)

(1)  Full-manuscript translation, particularly from Thai to English.

(2)  Code writing and data analysis, which must be declared in the Methods section and the code appended as supplementary material.

(3)  Preliminary literature-synthesis assistance, provided the researcher reads every original source.

(4)  Creation of conceptual diagrams or process charts, which must be stated in the figure caption.

Level 3 — Strictly Prohibited (Red)

(1)  Generating the core content of the manuscript — Introduction, Methods, Results, or Discussion.

(2)  Generating or manipulating images of primary research results.

(3)  Data fabrication or any falsification of research data.

(4)  Creating non-existent references (fake citations / hallucinations).

(5)  Embedding hidden prompts in manuscripts or using paper-mill services.

Article 6  Authors are obliged to disclose AI use clearly at the following locations:

(1)  Cover Letter — notify the Editor of the manner in which AI was used at the time of submission.

(2)  Acknowledgements — when AI was used to assist with writing, language polishing, or translation.

(3)  Methods section — when AI was used in the research process, data analysis, or code writing, and where reproducibility must be ensured.

Article 7  Disclosure under Article 6 shall follow the standard four-component format:

"During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [name and version of AI tool] for [purpose] in [section of manuscript]. The author(s) have reviewed and edited all content received from the AI and accept sole responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, and reliability of the work."

Article 8  Where no AI was used in preparing the manuscript, the following statement shall be included:

"The author(s) confirm that no generative artificial intelligence or AI-assisted technologies were used in any form in the preparation of this manuscript."

Article 9  Consequences of non-compliance with Articles 5 through 8:

(1)  Minor — the author omitted to declare permitted AI use: the journal will request addition of the declaration before proceeding.

(2)  Moderate — the author used AI beyond the permitted scope without disclosure: the manuscript is returned for Major Revision and re-verification.

(3)  Serious — the author failed to disclose the use of AI to generate core content: the manuscript is rejected and a formal warning is issued.

(4)  Most Serious — fake citations, data fabrication, or use of paper-mill services: immediate rejection, notification to the author's affiliated institution, and a ban from submission for 2–5 years.

Chapter 3  Guidelines for Peer Reviewers (Pillar 2)

Article 10  Peer Reviewers are required to perform the following duties:

(1)  Reviewers must read and analyse the scholarly value of the manuscript personally; AI may not be delegated to perform the evaluation.

(2)  Reviewers must complete a Reviewer Declaration Form on every occasion, specifying whether and how AI was used.

(3)  Reviewers must remain alert to hidden prompts that may be concealed in the manuscript; these may be detected by pressing Ctrl+A to reveal hidden text.

Article 11  The following are prohibited for Peer Reviewers:

(1)  Uploading the manuscript or any part thereof — including figures and tables — onto a public AI system, which constitutes a serious breach of confidentiality.

(2)  Having AI generate the entire review report, or delegating the review process to AI.

Article 12  The following are permissible for Peer Reviewers where the journal so allows:

(1)  Polishing the language of comments the reviewer has personally written, without entering manuscript content into the AI system.

(2)  Searching background literature using tools that preserve confidentiality and are authorised by the journal.

Article 13  Reviewer Declaration Form — to be signed on every occasion:

☐  I did not use any artificial intelligence in this review.

☐  I used AI solely to polish the language of comments I personally wrote (tool: ____________________), without entering any manuscript content into the AI system.

☐  I confirm that I did not upload the manuscript onto any AI system and that I read and analysed the manuscript personally.

Chapter 4  Guidelines for the Editorial Board (Pillar 3)

Article 14  The Editorial Board must observe the following human-oversight principles:

(1)  Every decision to accept, request revision of, or reject a manuscript must be made by a human editor. AI may assist with initial screening signals but a human must review every result.

(2)  Manuscripts, reviewer reports, and all correspondence in the publication process are confidential; uploading them onto a public AI system is strictly prohibited.

Article 15  The Editorial Board shall not use scores from AI-detection tools as the sole decisive evidence for rejecting a manuscript, as research by Liang et al. (Patterns, 2023) found that such tools have a false-positive rate of 61.3% for non-native English writers, and no formal validation against Thai-language texts has yet been established.

Article 16  When the Editorial Board detects suspicious signals in a manuscript prior to publication, the following steps shall be taken in order:

(1)  Self-verification: check references, figures, and any hidden text in the manuscript.

(2)  Neutral, non-accusatory inquiry to the author, requesting evidence and allowing a response period of no fewer than 7 and no more than 14 days.

(3)  Assessment of the explanation and evidence received, followed by a decision proportionate to the severity of the matter.

Article 17  Where a problem is identified after publication, the Editorial Board shall act in accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines (2025) as follows:

(1)  Receive the report and record the date and the name of the notifier.

(2)  Gather evidence independently through a review checklist; scores from AI-detection tools are treated as preliminary indicators only.

(3)  Contact all authors and allow a response period of no fewer than 2 and no more than 4 weeks.

(4)  Decide on one of the following actions based on the reliability of the research findings: issue a Correction, issue an Expression of Concern, or issue a Retraction.

(5)  Publish a notice on the article page in the system without deleting the original file; stamp the word "RETRACTED" on the file; and notify TCI and indexing databases, as well as the authors' affiliated institutions in serious cases.

Chapter 5  Disclosure of the Journal's Own AI Use (Pillar 4)

Article 18  The Journal of Management Science, Sakon Nakhon Rajabhat University, hereby discloses its own use of artificial intelligence in accordance with COPE and ICMJE guidelines (2026):

Item	Details
Tool used	CopyCatch (developed by NECTEC) for duplicate-content screening
Purpose	Initial-signal screening only; not for editorial decision-making
Review process	The editor reads the report and confirms every case before action is taken
What the journal does not permit	AI generating conclusions, drafting decision letters, or being delegated the manuscript-evaluation process
Policy custodian	Associate Professor Dr. Sanyasorn Sawasthaisong, Editor-in-Chief
Appeals channel	jmssnru@gmail.com (Subject: AI Review Appeal)

Chapter 6  Enforcement, Appeals, and Review

Article 19  This Announcement shall take effect from 1 January 2027, and shall apply to all authors, peer reviewers, and editorial board members, and to all article types of the journal.

Article 20  Authors and peer reviewers have the right to appeal any decision made under this Policy by submitting a written appeal to jmssnru@gmail.com within 30 days of the date of notification.

Article 21  The Editorial Board shall review and update this Announcement every 6 months, or when significant changes occur in international academic standards — including but not limited to the Vancouver Standard upon its entry into force — and shall publish the updated version together with its effective date and version number on the journal website.

Article 22  For enquiries or advice concerning this Policy prior to submission, please contact the Editorial Board at:

Email: jmssnru@gmail.com (Subject: AI Policy Enquiry)

Telephone: 065-646-9226 and 094-652-4145

Announced on 30 October 2026

(Associate Professor Dr. Sanyasorn Sawasthaisong)

Editor-in-Chief : Journal of Management Science, Sakon Nakhon Rajabhat University

 

References Used in Preparing This Policy

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2023). Position Statement on AI in Authorship.
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). (2026). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Section V.
• Liang, W., et al. (2023). GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers. Patterns.
• STM. (2025). Recommendations for a Classification of AI Use in Academic Manuscript Preparation.
• Springer Nature. (2026). Generative AI Policy Framework (September 2026).
• Topaz, J.M., et al. (2026). Artificial intelligence hallucinations in biomedical literature. The Lancet, 407, 1779–1781.