Publishing your research
When publishing research, genAI can help with suggesting target journals. It’s important that researchers consider the publisher’s author guidelines as they relate to genAI usage and disclose any use of genAI tools in their research. Researchers must also comply with the Research publication and dissemination procedure.
Researchers evaluate research through the critical appraisal of studies. They may also be involved as peer reviewers of others’ research prior to publication.
Responsible use
- Do declare when and how you have used genAI tools.
- Do review the publisher’s author guidelines and ensure compliance prior to submitting your manuscript.
Cautions
- Don’t submit writing generated by genAI for publication.
Case examples
Click on the plus icons below to explore exemplar and cautionary hypothetical scenarios for publishing research.
Exemplar - Case example 1
Nikki has completed her research project, written a manuscript and is ready to submit to a journal. She uses a genAI tool to suggest some journals to consider for submission of her manuscript. She does this by prompting the tool with her broad project topic but does not share details or any copy from her manuscript. She then reviews the author guidelines for the journal and makes particular note of the requirements for genAI. She discloses all her uses of genAI throughout the project and development of the manuscript.
Nikki is compliant with Deakin’s guidelines to support the use of Generative AI for researchers because she has familiarised herself with publisher policies, has not uploaded any of her data or her manuscript into genAI and she has disclosed her use of genAI.
Cautionary - Case example 2
Britta is supervising an HDR student who has written a manuscript and is ready to publish. The student has asked Britta for advice on where to submit. Britta finds a tool offered by a major publisher that offers to help find a suitable journal for manuscripts. All she has to do is copy-paste the abstract into the text box and the tool will suggest a journal for her. Britta does as instructed and a list of journals is generated.
Britta has unknowingly shared her student’s Intellectual Property with a genAI tool without permission; while this may not breach Deakin’s guidelines to support the use of Generative AI for researchers, she has failed to gain consent from her student to share their content with a genAI and also failed to exercise due diligence to ensure that intellectual property and privacy are protected by the use of the tool. Instead, Britta should have investigated the tool further to see if it used genAI and then sought permission from her student before sharing their content with a genAI.
Cautionary - Case example 3
Victor has completed a research project and written a manuscript with the support of genAI tools. He has been careful to track his use of genAI throughout the research project and has ensured that all uses of genAI were within Deakin’s guidelines to support the use of Generative AI for researchers. He has selected a preferred journal for publication and submits the manuscript. Victor is surprised to hear, a few months later, that his manuscript has been rejected because it does not comply with the journal’s policy on the use of genAI.
While Victor followed Deakin’s guidelines, he should have also checked the publisher’s policies before submitting. If publishing in that particular journal was essential, Victor should have checked the publisher's policies earlier in the research process. Victor now needs to find an alternative journal with a more permissive policy on the use of genAI, which may or may not meet his publishing goals.