AI Usage Guidelines

Hume Studies aims to publish original work of the highest scholarly standards on any aspect of the thought of David Hume. It welcomes thoughtful and responsible AI use consistent with this aim. In addition to their utility, there are a number of risks attendant on the use of the current generation of AI tools ranging from loss of rights to one’s own work, to inaccuracy and bias, to adverse environmental impacts (for more information, https://www.wiley.com/en-ca/publish/article/ai-guidelines/#content). Moreover, users should be aware that current AI tools can give incorrect answers, and do not always generate outputs that correspond to what their users intended. Unless linked to institutional data bases (i.e., to public or private data bases other than those available on the web), AI tools do not have access to the significant body of academic journals that exist behind paywalls. This reliance on open source and public domain material poses an added bias risk. Users must be aware of these risks and take measures to mitigate them when possible. This document lays out policies governing how authors, peer reviewers and editors may use AI, identifies some of the major risks users may incur, and directs users to resources where they may find best practices for mitigating those risks and disclosing AI use.

 

I. Authors:

When preparing and submitting their manuscripts, authors are responsible for ensuring that their use (if any) of AI tools does not compromise the originality of their work or leave that of others unacknowledged. Authors are advised to review the terms and conditions, terms of use, or any other conditions or licenses associated with the AI tool they intend to use. They must always disclose any use they make of AI tools, indicating purpose, impact on key arguments or conclusions and the human oversight strategy used to control AI’s results. Disclosures must further attest that AI was not used to generate core content. Disclosures must be included in the Acknowledgements section.

Authors are responsible for making sure their manuscripts comply with this policy, but Hume Studies maintains the right to reject or retract manuscripts or articles deemed to be in violation of it. This right of rejection/retraction does not relieve the author of liability both to Hume Studies and the public for breach of the policy.

Unlike search engines, which quote referenced material, current AI tools generate original responses to queries by scanning the web for (normally undisclosed) relevant material and then applying statistical scripts to mold that material into a response that has a high probability of addressing the query. While the response may not quote any human author(s), the concept is likely to be a variant (possibly a seriously incorrect one) on what others have said. Where human authors are quoted, no such individual or no such publication by that individual may exist, or if they do, they may never have said any such thing. Authors must exercise due diligence over determining whether anything discovered using AI was drawn from a human author, referencing that source, verifying that the source has been represented accurately, and omitting or correcting material that cannot be so sourced or verified. Authors also need to ensure that the AI tool they employ is appropriate and robust for their proposed use, and that the terms applicable to such tool provide sufficient safeguards and protections, particularly regarding intellectual property rights, confidentiality and security. In any case, AI tools are not authors (as they have no responsibility for the content they generate) and may not be cited or listed as such.

Acceptable uses of AI tools include:

•       making grammatical or spelling changes to originally written text

•       following recommendations to improve accessibility, clarity or readability, make idiomatic word choices or rephrase  awkward sentences,

•       reducing word count, complying with format requirements

•       doing literature searches

•       translating except (except as noted below)

Unacceptable uses include:

•       generating references or citations

•       translating any text that, if left in the original language could not be cited without the author’s or publisher’s permission

•       generating data tables or figures, or generating or modifying images

 In the event of ambiguity or uncertainty over AI usage, the author(s) should contact the editors.

 

II. Reviewers:

Peer reviewers are warned that AI tools can seize ownership of material uploaded to them. Where the material is the original work of an author the tool could use that material for training (influencing its responses to subsequent queries), apply very liberal open access licencing (allowing unattributed use) to the material, or prohibit others (including Hume Studies) from publishing it. Reviewers must not upload files, images or information from unpublished manuscripts into AI tools, be it in whole or in part. This extends to the peer review report, as it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. Reviewers should not upload their peer review report into an AI tool, even if it is just for the purpose of improving language and readability. The use of generative AI to conduct peer review reports is prohibited.

 

III. Editors:

The Editors shall abide by the same non-disclosure principles mandated for reviewers. They are not at this time making any use of AI tools for the processing, review, or editing of submissions.