The journal PROSPECTIVA adheres to the following recommendations for the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in scientific editing and publishing:

• Heredia Declaration
• UNESCO
• COPE

 

Use of AI by authors:

• Responsibility. AI cannot be considered as a co-author of the manuscripts submitted to the journal; AI is a tool, not a co-author. As it is not a legal entity, it cannot determine the existence or non-existence of conflicts of interest or manage copyright and licensing agreements. Those who perform the role of authorship are human beings, and only they can be recognized as having the capacity—in the exercise of their intellect—to create, make decisions, and assume responsibility for the works produced.

All the contents of the manuscript, its data, its structure and sections, its coherence, its argumentation, its analysis and its reliability are the sole responsibility of the authors and they will be fully responsible for the quality, veracity and scientific integrity of each manuscript, including any parts produced with an AI tool, and are therefore responsible for any breach of publication ethics.

• Transparency. Any use of AI in a manuscript must be declared and explained in detail how it has been used. However, using AI to generate research data and methodologies or create images derived from research results is not permitted. Concealing the use of AI tools will be considered unethical and will be grounds for rejection of a manuscript at any stage of the publication process.

Authors must declare the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in the Letter of Commitment attached when submitting the article. This declaration must specify:

• The type of AI tool used.
• The purpose for which it was used.
• The section of the manuscript in which it was applied.
• At what stage of the research it was used.
• How the AI-generated content was reviewed and verified.

If the manuscript is approved for publication, PROSPECTIVA will include the information provided in the Letter of Commitment in the final article statements, ensuring transparency in the research and writing process. Likewise, the author must include a description of the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in the Methodology section, specifying their purpose and application in the article. If the use of AI is limited to orthotypographical correction or translation tasks, this information will not be mentioned in the Methodology, but will be included in the final statements.

Authors must use artificial intelligence tools responsibly, as they must be aware of the biases that may arise in the stages or phases of constructing the algorithms of Large Language Models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, as well as the interaction with them and the data they are fed.

PROSPECTIVA remains committed to providing confidence to readers, protecting the rights of authors and the journal, and ensuring the publication of high-quality content.

Each case will be evaluated individually by the journal's editorial team to determine whether, based on the use of AI, the manuscript's publication is considered appropriate or not.

 

Use of AI by reviewers

Peer reviewers play a fundamental role in scientific publishing. Their expert assessments and recommendations guide editors in their decisions, ensuring that published research is sound, valid, and rigorous. PROSPECTIVA journal selects peer reviewers primarily for their in-depth knowledge of the subject, making their expertise irreplaceable.

Despite their rapid progress, generative AI tools have considerable limitations: they may lack up-to-date knowledge and generate inconsistent, biased, or false information. For this reason, reviewers should refrain from using AI tools to create reports. Reviewers are responsible for the opinions expressed in the review form and, therefore, for any breach of review and publication ethics.

Furthermore, it is essential to remember that manuscripts may contain sensitive or confidential information that should not be disclosed outside the peer review process. For these reasons, we request that reviewers treat the manuscript as a strictly confidential document and refrain from uploading it to generative AI tools, as this action would violate the journal's confidentiality policy.

If any statement in the evaluation form was supported in any way by an AI tool, we ask peer reviewers to declare the use of such tools transparently in the peer review form.