Similarity and AI Screening

TATEFL is committed to maintaining academic integrity, originality, transparency, and responsible research practices. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subject to similarity screening and may undergo screening for potential inappropriate use of artificial intelligence (AI). These procedures support editorial assessment and do not replace the journal's evaluation of the quality, originality, and scholarly contribution of each manuscript.

1. Similarity Screening

  • All submitted manuscripts undergo similarity screening using plagiarism detection software.
  • A similarity score exceeding 25%, excluding references, direct quotations, and commonly used phrases where appropriate, may trigger further editorial assessment. This threshold serves as an initial screening indicator rather than an automatic basis for rejection.
  • Authors must ensure that their manuscripts present original work and appropriately acknowledge the ideas, words, and findings of other researchers. Plagiarism, inadequate paraphrasing, unattributed use of published material, and undisclosed redundant publication are not permitted.
  • The editorial team evaluates the sources, nature, and context of identified similarities rather than relying solely on the overall similarity percentage.

2. Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence

TATEFL recognizes that AI tools can support academic writing and research when used responsibly and transparently. However, AI use must not compromise authorship, originality, research accuracy, or academic integrity. Authors remain fully responsible for all content submitted for publication, including content produced or revised with AI assistance.

2.1. Permitted Uses of AI

Authors may use AI tools to support their work in the following ways:

  • Language editing and proofreading: Correcting grammar, spelling, punctuation, and sentence structure, and improving clarity, readability, and academic expression.
  • Translation assistance: Supporting translation between languages, provided that the translated content accurately represents the original meaning.
  • Writing support: Improving the organization, coherence, and flow of author-developed text without replacing the authors' intellectual contribution.
  • Research support: Assisting with brainstorming, generating preliminary research questions, organizing ideas, and identifying potential search terms or research directions.
  • Data and coding assistance: Supporting data organization, statistical procedures, programming, or qualitative data analysis, provided that the authors verify the procedures, results, and interpretations.
  • Literature review assistance: Supporting the identification and preliminary summarization of relevant literature, provided that authors consult and verify the original sources and accurately represent the cited findings.

Authors must critically evaluate AI-generated suggestions and verify all factual claims, references, quotations, data, and interpretations before including them in a manuscript. AI tools must not be cited as the original source of information when that information comes from an identifiable scholarly publication.

2.2. Prohibited Uses of AI

The following uses of AI are not permitted:

  • Fabricating or manipulating research: Generating or altering data, results, images, interview responses, or experimental findings and presenting them as genuine research evidence.
  • Fabricating references: Inventing publications, authors, DOIs, quotations, or other bibliographic information, or citing sources that do not support the claims made.
  • Misrepresenting authorship or intellectual contribution: Presenting AI-generated work as evidence of the authors' own intellectual contribution without meaningful author involvement, critical evaluation, and responsibility for the content.
  • Replacing the research process: Using AI to generate substantial portions of a manuscript, including the literature review, methodology, findings, or discussion, without meaningful author involvement, verification, and intellectual contribution.
  • Plagiarism and misappropriation: Using AI to reproduce, disguise, or inadequately paraphrase the work of others without proper acknowledgment.
  • Concealing AI involvement: Failing to disclose AI use when disclosure is required by TATEFL's policies or when nondisclosure misrepresents the authors' research or writing process.
  • Violating confidentiality or research ethics: Uploading confidential manuscripts, unpublished research, identifiable participant information, or restricted data to AI systems without appropriate authorization and safeguards.

The use of AI to assist with writing does not automatically constitute misconduct. Concerns arise when AI use undermines the authenticity of the research, replaces the authors' substantive scholarly contribution, introduces unverified or fabricated information, or violates disclosure and ethical requirements.

3. Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI tools that contributed to the preparation of their manuscripts, in accordance with TATEFL's disclosure requirements. The disclosure should identify the AI tool used and explain its purpose, such as language editing, translation, literature review assistance, or data analysis support.

Routine spell-checking, basic grammar correction, and other conventional editing functions may not require disclosure unless the journal specifically requests it. Authors should consult the journal's applicable author guidelines for the required disclosure format.

AI tools cannot be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of published research. Authors remain accountable for the final manuscript and must ensure that all applicable ethical and publication requirements are met.

4. AI Screening and Editorial Assessment

TATEFL may use AI detection software and other appropriate assessment procedures to identify manuscripts that warrant further examination. AI detection scores are indicative only and must not be treated as conclusive evidence of misconduct. Such tools can produce false positives and false negatives, and their results may be affected by language proficiency, editing practices, and the characteristics of the text.

When concerns arise, the editorial team may examine the relevant passages, compare the manuscript with available evidence, review the authors' AI-use disclosure, and request clarification or supporting documentation. Authors may be invited to revise their manuscripts or explain how the work was developed.

Editorial decisions are based on the overall evidence, the nature and extent of the concern, the authors' explanations, and the journal's publication ethics policies. Confirmed or serious violations may result in rejection or other appropriate action under those policies.

5. Editorial Decisions and Publication Ethics

Similarity and AI screening are components of TATEFL's broader editorial quality assurance process. Neither a low similarity score nor a low AI detection score guarantees acceptance, and neither a high similarity score nor a high AI detection score automatically establishes misconduct.

All authors are expected to uphold the principles of originality, transparency, responsible AI use, and research integrity. TATEFL reserves the right to request further information, require revisions, reject manuscripts, or take other appropriate action when evidence indicates a breach of its publication ethics policies.

By submitting a manuscript to TATEFL, authors confirm that their work meets the journal's requirements for academic integrity and that any use of AI has been conducted responsibly and disclosed as required.