AI content in manuscripts and reviews

The AJSW position on AI

AJSW does not accept AI generated reviews, because authors could use AI to review their own work before submission, and because AI generated reviews lack the depth and specificity that human reviewers provide. As set out in the peer reviewer code in Lesson 2, you are expected to write your own assessment of the manuscript, across every Mtandao journal, not only AJSW.

For manuscripts, AI must not be used to create content in place of the author’s own problem identification, idea generation, creativity and critical thinking. AI cannot be used or cited as a source. Authors must clean submissions of inappropriate AI content, and where AI has been used at all, this must be acknowledged in writing, with an explanation of how and why it was used. Manuscripts based substantially on AI generated content are rejected.

What to look for as a reviewer

• Writing that is fluent but generic, without the specific detail, local reference or texture that comes from an author’s own fieldwork or reasoning
• An absence of any AI acknowledgement despite writing that reads as machine generated
• Citations that cannot be traced, or sources that appear plausible but do not exist, a known pattern in AI generated text
• A literature review or discussion section that summarises ideas accurately but never engages with tension, disagreement or nuance between sources

If you suspect a manuscript relies substantially on undisclosed AI content, raise this with the editor as a possible malpractice concern rather than a simple quality issue.