Plagiarism and Generative AI

Plagiarism Policy

Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan dan Pelatihan (JIPP)

Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan dan Pelatihan (JIPP) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and originality. All submissions must be the authors’ original work and free from any form of plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, redundant publication, and improper citation practices.

To ensure originality, all manuscripts are screened using Turnitin plagiarism detection software prior to the peer-review process. Manuscripts with a similarity index exceeding acceptable limits will be returned to the authors for revision or rejected at the editorial stage.

Similarity Threshold

  • Recommended similarity index: maximum 20% (overall)
  • Similarity from a single source should not exceed 5%
  • Properly cited quotations and references are excluded from misconduct considerations

Editorial decisions are not based solely on similarity percentage but also on context, citation accuracy, and academic integrity. Even low similarity scores may be subject to rejection if plagiarism or unethical reuse is identified.

Types of Unacceptable Practices

  • Direct plagiarism (copying without attribution)
  • Mosaic plagiarism (patchwriting without proper citation)
  • Self-plagiarism or duplicate submission/publication
  • Data fabrication or falsification
  • Inadequate acknowledgment of sources

Sanctions and Actions

If plagiarism is detected at any stage:

  • Before review: manuscript will be rejected outright
  • During review: review process will be terminated
  • After publication: article may be corrected or retracted in accordance with COPE guidelines

JIPP reserves the right to notify authors’ institutions in cases of serious ethical violations.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Usage Policy

Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan dan Pelatihan (JIPP)

1. Policy Rationale

Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan dan Pelatihan (JIPP) recognizes that Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly shaping the landscape of academic research and scholarly publishing. Within the fields of education, training, and human resource development, AI tools can enhance analytical efficiency, improve accessibility, and support knowledge production across diverse learning contexts.

At the same time, the journal emphasizes that scholarly work must remain grounded in critical reasoning, contextual understanding, and ethical responsibility. Therefore, the use of AI must be carefully regulated to safeguard academic integrity, originality, and accountability.

This policy establishes ethical standards for AI use in manuscript preparation, aligned with best practices promoted by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and international indexing standards such as Scopus.

2. Definition of AI Tools

For the purpose of this policy, AI tools refer to computational systems that employ techniques such as machine learning, natural language processing (NLP), and generative models to assist in producing, processing, or transforming scholarly content.

These include, but are not limited to:

  • Generative AI systems (e.g., ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude)
  • Language enhancement tools (e.g., Grammarly, DeepL Write)
  • AI-assisted data analysis and coding platforms
  • Automated literature discovery and citation tools
  • Visualization and modeling software supported by AI

3. Acceptable Use of AI

JIPP permits the limited and responsible use of AI tools, provided that such use does not replace the intellectual contribution of the author.

a. Permissible Applications

  • Improving grammar, clarity, and academic tone
  • Assisting non-native English speakers in language refinement
  • Organizing references and citations
  • Conducting preliminary literature searches
  • Generating draft code for statistical or qualitative analysis (subject to verification)
  • Creating simple visualizations (charts, diagrams) that are original

b. Prohibited and Restricted Uses

  • Generating entire manuscripts or core scholarly arguments without substantial human intellectual input
  • Producing fabricated or manipulated data (quantitative or qualitative)
  • Creating fictitious citations or misleading references
  • Conducting automated paraphrasing that results in plagiarism
  • Misrepresenting AI-generated content as fully original human scholarship
  • Using AI to simulate field data, interviews, or training outcomes

4. Author Responsibility and Accountability

Authors bear full responsibility for all submitted content, including any sections developed with AI assistance. This includes:

  • Ensuring accuracy, validity, and originality
  • Verifying all AI-assisted outputs (data, text, code, interpretation)
  • Eliminating errors, bias, or “hallucinated” information
  • Maintaining conceptual and methodological rigor

AI must function strictly as a supporting tool, not as a substitute for scholarly thinking.

5. Authorship Criteria

AI tools cannot be recognized as authors under any circumstances. Authorship in JIPP is reserved exclusively for human contributors who:

  • Conceptualize the study
  • Conduct analysis and interpretation
  • Develop arguments and theoretical insights
  • Take responsibility for the integrity of the work

Any attempt to list AI as an author or co-author will result in immediate rejection.

6. Disclosure and Transparency

JIPP requires full transparency regarding the use of AI tools beyond basic language editing.

Authors must disclose:

  • The name and version of the AI tool
  • The purpose of its use
  • The extent of its contribution
  • Confirmation of human verification and revision

Suggested Disclosure Statement

“During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [AI Tool Name] for [specific purpose]. All outputs were critically reviewed and revised by the author(s), who take full responsibility for the final content.”

7. Placement of Disclosure

  • Methods section → for data analysis or research design support
  • Acknowledgments section → for language editing or minor assistance
  • Dedicated AI Statement section (recommended)

8. Editorial and Peer Review Process

The editorial board of JIPP evaluates AI usage as part of ethical screening and peer review.

If misuse or non-disclosure is suspected, the journal may:

  • Request clarification or revision
  • Reject the manuscript
  • Initiate ethical review procedures

AI-detection tools may be used as supplementary instruments, but final judgment remains human-centered.

9. Sanctions for Policy Violations

  • Desk rejection
  • Retraction of published articles
  • Notification to affiliated institutions
  • Temporary or permanent submission bans

10. Appeals Mechanism

Authors may submit a formal appeal to the Editor-in-Chief if they contest decisions related to AI usage. Appeals must include:

  • Clear explanation of disagreement
  • Supporting evidence
  • Reference to this policy

11. AI Use in Editorial Management

JIPP does not employ AI for autonomous editorial decision-making. Any AI use in editorial workflows is limited, transparent, and supervised by human editors.

12. Policy Review and Updates

This policy will be periodically updated to reflect technological developments, evolving ethical standards, and global publishing practices.

13. Ethical Alignment

This policy is aligned with international best practices, particularly those of:

  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
  • Global indexing standards including Scopus

Closing Statement

Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan dan Pelatihan (JIPP) supports the responsible integration of AI as a tool to enhance—rather than replace—scholarly work. The journal is committed to maintaining academic integrity, methodological rigor, and ethical responsibility in advancing research in education and training.