New Trends in Qualitative Research (NTQR) recognises the potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools to support scientific research, data analysis, writing and editorial management. However, their use must comply with the principles of research integrity, transparency, methodological rigour, human accountability, confidentiality and data protection.
This policy establishes the principles and conditions governing the use of AI tools by authors, peer reviewers and editors involved in the submission, review and publication of articles in NTQR.
Authors must explicitly disclose the use of AI tools in research, data analysis, the preparation of scholarly content or the writing of an article.
The disclosure requirement covers the use of generative AI to produce, translate or substantially reformulate content, as well as other AI applications involved in research procedures. It does not cover conventional spelling or grammar checking, formatting or reference management functions, provided that they do not generate scholarly content or influence research decisions.
Whenever AI tools subject to this disclosure requirement are used, the statement must identify:
The name of the tool used and, where relevant, its version;
The purpose and nature of its use;
The stage of the research or article preparation at which it was used;
The human oversight, verification and validation procedures adopted, as appropriate to the nature of its use.
The use of AI tools does not replace the authors’ intellectual contribution, methodological rigour, critical interpretation or responsibility for the originality, accuracy and integrity of the scholarly content.
AI tools may not be listed as authors or co-authors of articles, nor may scientific or editorial responsibility be attributed to them.
Authors are responsible for verifying any content produced with AI assistance, including factual accuracy, the authenticity of bibliographic references, appropriate source attribution and the prevention of plagiarism.
The use of AI to fabricate or falsify data, references, findings or other scholarly information is prohibited, as is the presentation of artificially generated content as authentic empirical evidence.
The use of synthetic data or AI-generated content for simulation, demonstration, methodological development or methodological evaluation is permitted, provided that such material is clearly identified, scientifically justified and distinguished from empirical data. Such content must not be presented as participants’ testimonies, observations, lived experiences or findings derived from data actually collected.
The use of AI must be disclosed at the time of initial submission, and the disclosure must be updated whenever AI tools are used additionally during the revision process. Where AI is involved in methodological design, data collection or generation, analysis or interpretation, its use must also be described in the Methodology section or an equivalent section. A separate disclosure statement does not replace this methodological description.
Whenever AI tools are used in methodological design, data collection or generation, coding, analysis or interpretation of qualitative data, authors must clearly describe how these tools were integrated into the research process.
Their use must be methodologically justified, enabling readers and reviewers to understand the role played by AI, the decisions made by researchers and the procedures adopted to ensure the rigour, transparency and traceability of the scientific process.
The methodological description must specify the tasks assigned to AI, the criteria used to assess its outputs, and how researchers accepted, modified or rejected the suggestions generated.
Where necessary to understand, evaluate or reproduce the procedure, examples of instructions (prompts), interaction criteria and relevant records should be provided, while safeguarding data confidentiality and participants’ rights.
The input of interviews, transcripts, field notes, images, recordings or other research data into AI systems must comply with the conditions of informed consent, applicable data protection legislation and the ethical and confidentiality obligations undertaken towards participants and the institutions involved.
Before using external AI services, researchers must assess the applicable conditions concerning data processing, storage, access, reuse, transfer and potential use for system training. Anonymisation or pseudonymisation does not remove the need to assess the risks of re-identification and unauthorised disclosure of sensitive information.
Authors must ensure that the use of these tools does not compromise the protection of participants or inappropriately replace human scientific interpretation and accountability.
Peer reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of submitted articles and all information associated with the peer review process.
Unpublished articles, excerpts from their content, research data or other confidential information must not be entered into external AI systems without prior express authorisation from NTQR and adequate safeguards concerning information protection and the rights of those involved.
Where necessary, authorisation will also depend on the authors’ consent and an assessment of the conditions governing access, retention, reuse, transfer and potential use of content for system training.
Removing authors’ names or other identifying information does not, in itself, remove the confidential nature of an article.
The use of AI tools for language assistance, translation or organisation of the reviewer’s own report may be permitted, provided that it does not involve disclosing confidential information, does not compromise the scientific independence of the review and complies with this policy.
Any use of generative AI in preparing a review report must be disclosed to the responsible editor, identifying the tool used and its purpose. Such disclosure does not replace the requirement for prior authorisation where applicable.
Review reports, recommendations and scientific judgements must result from the reviewer’s independent critical assessment. Reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, justification and integrity of their reports.
The use of AI must not replace reading the article in full, assessing its methodology or independently formulating scientific recommendations.
Editors must ensure that the use of AI tools in editorial activities respects the confidentiality of submitted articles, personal data protection, the rights of authors and reviewers, and the independence of scientific decisions.
Unpublished articles, confidential review reports, restricted editorial communications or other protected content must not be entered into external AI tools without appropriate authorisation and effective safeguards for security, confidentiality and data protection.
AI tools may support administrative, linguistic, technical or organisational tasks, provided that their use does not compromise the confidentiality of editorial processes or replace editors’ independent professional responsibilities.
The assessment of the scientific quality of articles, interpretation of review reports, consideration of potential conflicts of interest, and decisions to accept or reject articles remain the exclusive responsibility of human editors.
Whenever NTQR uses AI tools in editorial or production procedures involving article content, it will inform authors of the purposes of such use and the safeguards in place, ensuring transparency throughout the process.
At the time of submission, authors must indicate whether they have used AI tools covered by this policy.
Where applicable, the final version of the article must include a separate section entitled “Use of Artificial Intelligence”, identifying the tools used, their purposes and the nature of their involvement.
The declaration must provide a clear and transparent account of how AI was used in the research or preparation of the article. It does not replace the methodological description required when AI tools have been involved in scientific procedures.
NTQR may request clarification or additional information whenever declarations are insufficient, ambiguous or inconsistent with the principles established in this policy.
Failure to disclose AI use does not automatically constitute research misconduct and must be assessed in light of the circumstances, the nature of the use and its potential impact on the integrity of the article.
Scientific, ethical and editorial responsibility always remains with the human individuals involved.
NTQR may assess compliance with this policy whenever there are substantiated concerns regarding the use of AI tools in the preparation, review or publication of an article.
The results of automated AI-generated content detection tools do not, on their own, constitute evidence of improper AI use or sufficient grounds for an adverse editorial decision.
Where such results are used, they must be interpreted with caution, taking into account technical limitations, the possibility of false positives and false negatives, and the diversity of legitimate writing and language-assistance practices.
The use of detection tools must also comply with confidentiality obligations, data protection requirements and authors’ rights, and must not involve the unauthorised transfer of unpublished scholarly content to external services.
Any concerns or suspected breaches will be assessed through a reasoned editorial review, and clarification may be requested from authors or other individuals involved.
Potential breaches will be assessed according to their nature, seriousness, intent where demonstrable, and impact on research integrity, while ensuring that those concerned have an opportunity to provide explanations.
Depending on the circumstances and the stage of the editorial process, proportionate measures may be adopted, including requests for clarification, corrections, article revisions, rejection of the submission or, following publication, the issuance of a correction, expression of concern or retraction, in accordance with NTQR’s editorial policies and the principles of publication ethics.
NTQR is committed to ensuring that such matters are addressed objectively, with appropriate justification and proportionality, while respecting confidentiality, impartiality and the rights of all parties involved.
This policy draws on the principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) concerning authorship, research integrity, transparency and the responsible use of Artificial Intelligence tools.
NTQR monitors developments in international guidance in this area and may update this policy whenever necessary to address new technological, methodological or ethical developments.