Sage Journals Information

Publication ethics policies

Overview Artificial intelligence policy Authorship guidelines Citation manipulation policy Commentaries, critiques and responses Complaints and appeals Corrections and retractions policy Declaration of conflicting interests Disclaimers Ethics & responsibility Ethics approval and informed consent statements Funding statements Identifying images and information policy Prior publication Request for anonymity Research data sharing policies Simultaneous submissions policy Special collections at Sage

Publication ethics policies

Artificial intelligence policy

Sage recognizes that large language models (LLMs) or Gen AI offer opportunities for acceleration in research and its dissemination. While these opportunities can be transformative, they are unable to replicate human creative and critical thinking. We distinguish various uses for AI and related technologies as: assistive (and no longer requiring disclosure), generative (requiring disclosure), and prohibitive. Sage’s policy on the use of AI technology has been developed to assist authors, reviewers and editors to make good judgements about the ethical use of such technology.

AI assistance (no disclosure required)

We recognize that AI- assisted writing has become more common as the technology becomes more accessible. AI tools that make suggestions to improve or enhance your own work, such as tools to improve language, grammar, or structure, are considered assistive AI tools and do not require disclosure by authors or reviewers. However, authors are responsible for ensuring their submission is accurate and meets the  standards for rigorous scholarship

AI generated (disclosure required)

The primary or partial use of AI tools and/or LLMs that produce content such as references, text, images, or any other content that directly impacts the research methodology, analysis, results and/or conclusions must be disclosed upon submission so the editorial team can evaluate the content generated. Authors should cite original sources, rather than GenAI tools as primary sources within the references. It may be appropriate to cite GenAI tools when they have been used to create images or visualization as representative contributions rather than original. Understanding that LLMs may have generated false content, including getting facts wrong or generating citations that don’t exist, authors must take steps to verify the accuracy of all outputs and check the original sources.

Authors should consider the following as appropriate uses for GenAI in research publishing that require disclosure within the methods or acknowledgements:

Assistance with literature review or compilation of relevant sources
Translation of materials as part of the research process
Using software or code generated by AI to undertake additional research
Assistance in research data visualization
Generation of representative illustrations or infographics
Code enhanced or checked for errors by AI assistance
Assistance with compilation of references

Prohibited use of AI

While submissions will not be rejected solely because of the disclosed use of GenAI tools, if the editor becomes aware that GenAI was inappropriately used in the preparation of a submission without disclosure, the editor reserves the right to reject the submission at any time during the publishing process.

Reviewers using ChatGPT or other GenAI tools to generate review reports inappropriately will not be invited to review for the journal and their review will not be included in the final decision.

Editors must not use ChatGPT or other GenAI to generate decision letters, or summaries of unpublished research. The journal and publisher reserve the right to take action if reviewers and editors breach peer-review confidentiality by using GenAI tools.

Inappropriate use of GenAI includes:

Generation of incorrect text or content
Generation of data or submission using a series of prompts
Conducting interviews with GenAI tools in lieu of participants for qualitative research
Analysis of experiences and themes
Plagiarism or inappropriate attribution to prior sources
Generated images that are presented as unique or novel research images
Fabricated references or falsified claims
Use of GenAI tools for editorial work or to conduct peer-review

Undisclosed use of AI/LLM tools

Reviewers suspecting the inappropriate or undisclosed use of generative AI in a submission should flag their concerns with the journal editor. If editors suspect the use of Generative AI in a submitted manuscript or a submitted review, they should consider this policy in undertaking an editorial assessment of the matter or contact their Sage representative for advice.

Sage and the journal editor will lead a joint investigation into concerns raised about the inappropriate or undisclosed use of GenAI in a published article in accordance with guidance issued by COPE and our internal policies. 

Information for

Sage Journals Information

Publication ethics policies

Publication ethics policies

Artificial intelligence policy

AI assistance (no disclosure required)

AI generated (disclosure required)

Prohibited use of AI

Undisclosed use of AI/LLM tools

Further reading

Information for