Generative AI Policy

1. Purpose and Scope of the Policy

Mütefekkir is a journal published twice a year (June and December) in Turkish and English by the Faculty of Theology of Aksaray University. It publishes scholarly work in religious studies and all sub-fields of Islamic sciences (tafsir, hadith, kalam, fiqh, Islamic history, Islamic philosophy, Sufism, etc.), as well as in Middle Eastern studies, Ottoman studies, and Religious Culture and Ethics Education.

This policy defines how generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and AI-assisted tools — including large language models such as ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini — may be used by authors, reviewers, and editors in all submissions and publications of this journal (articles, book reviews, translations, letters, etc.), and specifies which uses are unacceptable. The policy has been developed based on the Council of Higher Education's (YÖK) Ethical Guidelines for the Use of Generative AI in Scientific Research and Publication Activities in Higher Education Institutions (18 April 2024) and TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Index evaluation criteria, as well as international standards set by COPE, WAME, ICMJE, and the policies of Elsevier, Taylor & Francis, Wiley, Sage, and Emerald.

2. Core Ethical Principles

Mütefekkir adheres to the following core principles as defined in the YÖK guidelines and endorsed by international publication ethics organizations (COPE, WAME, ICMJE):

• Transparency: AI use must be explicitly disclosed in the work; the tool used, its version, purpose, and scope of impact must be made visible.

• Integrity: GenAI-assisted content cannot replace the author's original scholarly contribution; the intellectual ownership of the work belongs to the author.

• Diligence: Authors are obligated to carefully verify AI-generated outputs against religious sources and academic literature.

• Accountability: Only the human author(s) are responsible for the entirety of the work, including Quranic verses, hadiths, citations, and AI-generated text.

• Confidentiality and Privacy: Unpublished manuscripts, peer review reports, field study data, and participant information must not be uploaded to publicly accessible AI services.

• Justice and Respect: Sensitivity must be exercised toward cultural, religious, and sectarian biases in GenAI outputs; respect for individuals and groups must be maintained.

• Contribution to an Ethical Culture: Authors, reviewers, and editors actively contribute to the promotion of responsible AI use.

3. Permitted Uses

Authors may use AI tools for the purposes listed below, provided they comply with the disclosure obligations defined in Section 5:

3.1 Language and Style

- Grammar, spelling, and punctuation checking in Turkish and English manuscripts.

- Improving sentence flow, enhancing clarity, and ensuring stylistic consistency.

- Academic language support for non-native speakers (especially for English and Arabic publications).

- Translation review and comparative proofreading (for reviewing the author's own translation).

3.2 Research and Structure

- Preliminary research support for literature reviews (provided results are always verified from primary sources).

- Concept mapping, idea development, and brainstorming for theoretical framework construction.

- Article structure planning, and receiving suggestions for titles and abstracts.

- Reference formatting checks (e.g., compliance with the ISNAD citation system).

- Descriptive computational support for the analysis of statistical or quantitative data (provided documentation is kept in the methodology section).

3.3 Technical Level

- Formatting support in the preparation of visuals (tables, charts, and diagrams only), provided they are based solely on the author's own data and contain no manipulation.

- Suggestions for index creation and keyword generation.

- Compliance checks for open access and journal formatting templates.

4. Prohibited and Unacceptable Uses

The following uses are strictly unacceptable by Mütefekkir and, when detected, will result in the sanctions outlined in Section 8:

4.1 Authorship and Accountability

- Listing an AI tool as an author, co-author, or contributor.

- Citing AI output as a scholarly source instead of attributing it correctly; using AI output in lieu of a source.

- Having AI write the entirety or a substantial portion of the work while presenting it as a human contribution (constitutes plagiarism).

4.2 Religious and Academic Content Integrity

- Generating and directly using Quranic verse and hadith texts (Arabic originals, translations, or paraphrases) via AI; such texts must always be sourced directly from authoritative references.

- Conducting specialized procedures such as hadith takhrij, isnad analysis, or rijal examination based solely on AI output.

- Citing opinions or attributions in tafsir, fiqh, and kalam texts solely via AI; all opinions and attributions must be verified from primary sources.

- Fabricated quotations or hallucination-based citations from classical Islamic works.

- AI-generated fake bibliographies, non-existent works, or fictitious author names.

4.3 Data and Visual Integrity

- Synthetically generating or altering primary research data (surveys, interviews, field observations, etc.) using AI.

- Generating or manipulating visuals such as photographs, miniatures, calligraphy samples, architectural images, and maps using AI (not publishable).

- Submitting an AI-generated translation as a translation article without the author reviewing it and assuming responsibility.

4.4 Process Violations

- Concealing or misrepresenting AI use in the work.

- Uploading confidential content — such as peer review reports, editor correspondence, unpublished manuscripts, or ethics board documents — to publicly accessible AI services.

- Uncontrolled use of AI tools whose terms of service include the author's text in training data.

5. Disclosure Obligations

Authors must disclose any permitted AI uses described in Section 3 — except for basic writing assistance tools (e.g., Microsoft Editor, Turkish spell checkers) — in their articles in the following format:

"Declaration on the Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies: During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [tool name and version] for the purpose of [purpose: language improvement / idea development / literature review / etc.]. The author(s) have reviewed the outputs for accuracy and assume full responsibility for the published work."

• The declaration must appear under the relevant heading in the Publication Agreement.

• The declaration must also remain visible in the published version of the article, alongside both the Turkish and English abstracts.

• If multiple tools were used, each must be specified separately.

• Sentences taken directly from AI output may not be used in quotation marks; in all cases, the author must provide original citations from religious and academic sources.

6. AI Use in Peer Review and Editorial Processes

Mütefekkir is committed to conducting peer review processes on the basis of confidentiality, independence, and human judgment:

• Reviewers may under no circumstances upload manuscripts assigned to them to publicly accessible AI services; this constitutes a clear breach of confidentiality.

• Peer review reports must be written based on the reviewer's own reading, evaluation, and expertise; reports generated or substantially rewritten by AI will not be accepted.

• Reviewers may use limited AI assistance on their own reports for language improvement purposes; however, it is recommended that they inform the editor of this.

• Editors may use AI-assisted tools in processes such as plagiarism detection, language review, and format compliance. However, editorial decisions — such as reviewer selection, acceptance/rejection, or content evaluation — are made solely by human judgment.

• The Mütefekkir editorial board may use AI-assisted plagiarism detection tools (e.g., iThenticate and its integrations) to identify AI-generated content; where deemed necessary, additional disclosure or evidence may be requested from authors.

7. Author Responsibilities

• Author(s) are obligated to review all AI-generated or AI-improved content and to identify and eliminate hallucinations, fabricated references, and erroneous information.

• All Quranic verses, hadiths, classical work citations, and modern references must be verified from authoritative primary sources.

• Authors must have reviewed the terms of use of the AI tool employed and confirmed that it does not compromise the rights of the article in terms of personal data, copyright, and data training.

• In multi-authored works, AI use is shared with all co-authors and declared with joint approval.

• Authors must be prepared to provide the AI prompts and outputs used, upon the editor's request.

8. Violations and Sanctions

When a violation of this policy is detected, the following sanctions will be applied depending on the nature of the violation:

• Missing or incorrect disclosure: The author will be asked to resubmit with a revised and appropriate declaration.

• Authorship claims, synthetic data, manipulated visuals, or extensive AI-generated content: The submission will be withdrawn from evaluation; if necessary, the author's affiliated institution will be notified.

• If a violation is detected in a published article: A correction, expression of concern, or retraction will be applied in accordance with COPE guidelines.

• Reviewer breach of confidentiality: The reviewer in question will be removed from the reviewer pool and reported to their institution.

9. Entry into Force and Updates

This policy is in effect from the date it is approved by the Mütefekkir Editorial Board. In view of the rapid development of artificial intelligence technologies, the policy will be reviewed at least once a year and, where necessary, aligned with updates from TR Index, YÖK, and international publication ethics organizations. Authors and reviewers are subject to the version of the policy in force at the time of submission.

References

• Elsevier — The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in writing

• Elsevier — Generative AI policies for journals

• Elsevier — AI in the review process

• Taylor & Francis — AI Policy

• T&F Newsroom — Expanded Guidance on AI Application

• Taylor & Francis Editorial Policies (Author Services)

• Wiley — AI Guidelines

• Wiley — Generative AI Policy (PDF)

• Sage — Assistive and generative AI guidelines for authors

• Emerald — Stance on AI tools and authorship

• Emerald — Stance on AI in content creation and peer review

• Clarivate — Bringing Generative AI to the Web of Science

• Clarivate — Editorial Policies & Selection Process