Journal of Global Economic Strategy and Cooperation (JGESC) adheres to the principles of academic integrity and publication ethics, and in light of the widespread application of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in academic research and writing, we formulate the following regulations on the use of AI (including large language models such as ChatGPT, Google Bard, and professional academic AI tools) by authors in the process of manuscript creation:
1.1 Authors must explicitly disclose the specific AI tools used (including the name, version number, and developer) and the specific application scenarios in the cover letter or a dedicated "AI Usage Statement" section of the manuscript. Examples of application scenarios include:
1.2 If AI tools are used for multiple links in the research process, authors need to detail the role of AI in each link and the extent of human intervention and revision after AI output. Failure to make a complete and accurate disclosure will be regarded as a violation of the journal's publication ethics.
2.1 AI tools cannot be listed as authors of the manuscript under any circumstances. Authorship requires substantive contributions to the research (including conception and design, data collection and analysis, manuscript writing and revision, etc.), and AI tools lack legal personhood and cannot take corresponding academic responsibility, which is in line with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
2.2 Authors bear full academic and legal responsibility for all content generated with the assistance of AI tools, including but not limited to the accuracy of data analysis results, the rationality of research conclusions, the originality of academic viewpoints, and compliance with copyright laws. If the content generated by AI involves plagiarism, infringement, or false information, the authors shall be solely liable.
3.1 It is strictly forbidden to use AI tools to generate the core content of the manuscript (such as research hypotheses, empirical analysis results, and key discussion conclusions) without human verification and revision.
3.2 Do not use AI tools to fabricate research data, experimental results, or references, or to conceal research flaws and errors.
3.3 It is prohibited to use AI tools to bypass the journal's peer review process (e.g., using AI to generate fake reviewer comments or modify the manuscript against the review opinions) or to engage in other behaviors that violate academic integrity.
4.1 The editorial board will check the AI usage disclosure statement submitted by authors during the initial review stage. If the disclosure is incomplete or inconsistent with the actual usage, the manuscript will be returned for revision, and the revision period will be calculated in accordance with the journal's normal review process.
4.2 If authors are found to have violated the above regulations (such as undisclosed AI usage, using AI to generate core research content, etc.), the journal will classify the behavior as academic misconduct and impose corresponding penalties in accordance with the Academic Misconduct Penalty Mechanism of JGESC, including but not limited to returning the manuscript, prohibiting submission for a specified period, and publicly announcing the violation.
4.3 After the manuscript is published, if it is found that the author has concealed the AI usage situation or used AI in violation of regulations, the journal has the right to issue a correction notice or even retract the manuscript in accordance with COPE guidelines, and notify the author's affiliated institution and relevant academic organizations.
Standardize the operation process of double/double anonymized review, ensure the rigor of blind review implementation, avoid identity disclosure, and guarantee the impartiality of peer review.
1.1 Clearly publish the journal’s peer review model (double anonymization options) on the official website submission guidelines, including anonymization requirements, prohibited behaviors, and appeal channels.
1.2 Configure the submission system to set up mandatory anonymized manuscript upload channels, and add pop-up reminders of anonymization standards during submission.
1.3 Compile and distribute the Author Anonymization Guide and Reviewer Anonymity Compliance Manual on the submission platform.
| Anonymization Item | Specific Operations | Prohibited Behaviors |
|---|---|---|
| Manuscript Content | 1. Remove author names, affiliations, correspondence emails, and ORCID IDs from the title page, header/footer, and text. 2. Delete all self-citation descriptions that reveal identity (e.g., "our previous study [1]"). | 1. Do not embed hidden identity clues (e.g., coded language, unique dataset names linked to the research team). 2. Do not retain funder logos with team-specific information in the text. |
| Supplementary Materials | 1. Anonymize all appendices, supplementary data, and survey tools. 2. Remove institutional logos from questionnaires, experimental facility photos, and data collection instruments. | 1. Do not attach supplementary materials that contain author or institutional identifiers. 2. Do not include personal signatures or lab codes in supplementary data files. |
| Reference List | 1. Retain normal self-citations in the reference list. 2. Do not mark self-citations with special notes (e.g., "our work"). | 1. Do not delete self-citations deliberately to avoid identity inference. 2. Do not add redundant non-self-citations to disguise identity. |
2.2.1 After manuscript submission, the editorial assistant shall conduct a full-text anonymity check within 1 working day based on theAnonymization Check List.
2.2.2 If identifying information is found, the editorial office shall notify the author to revise it within 3 working days; the manuscript will not enter the reviewer selection stage until it passes the recheck.
2.2.3 For double anonymized review, the editorial office shall generate a unique manuscript code (format:JGESC-Year-Serial Number) to replace the author information in all subsequent communication and review links.
3.1.1 Avoid selecting reviewers with obvious conflicts of interest, including:
3.1.2 For double anonymized review, the handling editor shall not disclose any author information to the decision-making editor, and the decision-making editor shall not interfere with the reviewer selection process.
3.2.1 When sending review invitations, the email shall only include the anonymized manuscript code and the blinded manuscript, without any author-related information (name, affiliation, funding project, etc.).
3.2.2 The review report template shall be set to prohibit reviewers from filling in personal information that may reveal their identity (e.g., institutional affiliation, research project number); the editorial assistant shall check the review report for identity clues before sending it to the author.
3.2.3 All correspondence between the editorial office and reviewers/authors shall use the manuscript code instead of the author’s name or reviewer’s name.
4.1 Reviewers must evaluate the manuscript solely based on scientific content and methodological rigor, without attempting to search for or deduce the author’s identity through preprint platforms, research databases, academic networks, or writing style analysis.
4.2 Reviewers shall not disclose their identity as reviewers to the author directly or indirectly, or discuss the manuscript content with third parties unrelated to the review.
4.3 If a reviewer accidentally infers the author’s identity, they must immediately notify the editorial office and apply for recusal if a conflict of interest is involved.
4.4 Reviewers shall not include personal opinions or comments related to the author’s identity in the review report; all feedback must be focused on the manuscript’s academic quality.
| Role | Permissions | Prohibited Behaviors |
|---|---|---|
| Handling Editor | 1. Access to author/reviewer identities 2. Responsible for manuscript anonymization, reviewer selection, and communication coordination 3. Can adjust reviewer assignments based on initial feedback | 1. Disclose author/reviewer identities to the decision-making editor 2. Modify the anonymized manuscript content without authorization 3. Share review comments with non-relevant staff |
| Decision-Making Editor | 1. Only access to the anonymized manuscript and review reports 2. Responsible for making final publication decisions (accept/reject/revise) 3. Can request additional review reports if needed | 1. Request author/reviewer identity information from the handling editor 2. Contact reviewers/authors privately to confirm identity 3. Modify the anonymization status of the manuscript |
| Editorial Assistant | 1. Assist in anonymization checks and document sorting 2. Manage manuscript code and submission system records 3. Coordinate communication between editors, authors, and reviewers | 1. Leak manuscript codes or anonymization status to external personnel 2. Alter review report content or author revision materials 3. Access reviewer identity information without authorization |
6.1 For double anonymized review, the editorial office shall not disclose reviewer identities to authors after the final decision is made, unless the reviewer voluntarily agrees to public disclosure in writing.
6.2 All anonymized manuscripts and review materials shall be stored in encrypted form on the journal’s internal server; the storage period shall comply with the journal’s document retention regulations (minimum 5 years).
6.3 For manuscripts participating in the Article Transfer Service, the editorial office shall transfer the anonymized manuscript and review reports to the destination journal, and clearly inform the destination journal of the original anonymization requirements in the transfer letter.
6.4 After publication, the journal shall not publish any identity information related to reviewers without prior consent.
7.1 Author Violations: If authors violate anonymization rules (e.g., hiding identity clues, failing to revise identifying information), the editorial office has the right to:
7.2 Reviewer Violations: If reviewers disclose their identity, deduce the author’s identity without reporting, or violate anonymity rules, the journal will:
7.3 Editorial Staff Violations: If editorial staff leak identity information due to operational errors or intentional behavior, they shall be subject to:
Manuscript Title: ________________________
Submission Date: ________________________
Author Declaration: I confirm that all items below have been completed in accordance with the journal’s anonymization requirements.
| Check Item | Completed (√) | Not Completed (×) | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Author names, affiliations, and ORCID IDs removed from title page | □ | □ | |
| 2. Author information removed from header, footer, and page numbers | □ | □ | |
| 3. Correspondence email, phone number, and postal address removed | □ | □ | |
| 4. Identity-revealing self-citation descriptions (e.g., "our study") deleted | □ | □ | |
| 5. Funder logos, project numbers with team info removed | □ | □ | |
| 6. Supplementary materials (appendices, data) anonymized | □ | □ | |
| 7. Institutional logos removed from questionnaires/experimental photos | □ | □ | |
| 8. Self-citations in reference list retained without special marks | □ | □ | |
| 9. No hidden identity clues (coded language, unique dataset names) | □ | □ | |
| 10. Blinded manuscript saved as a separate file for submission | □ | □ |
Author Signature: ________________________
Date: ________________________
Manuscript Code: ________________________
Reviewer (Editorial Assistant): ________________________
Review Date: ________________________
Review Type: □ Initial Check □ Recheck After Author Revision
| Review Item | Pass (√) | Fail (×) | Problem Description | Handling Suggestion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. No author names/affiliations in title page and text | □ | □ | ||
| 2. No contact information (email, phone, address) retained | □ | □ | ||
| 3. No identity-revealing self-citation descriptions | □ | □ | ||
| 4. No funder logos or project numbers with team info | □ | □ | ||
| 5. Supplementary materials fully anonymized | □ | □ | ||
| 6. No hidden identity clues (coded language, unique labels) | □ | □ | ||
| 7. Manuscript code generated and replaced author info (for double/double anonymization) | □ | □ | ||
| 8. Review report template free of identity-revealing fields | □ | □ |
Overall Review Result: □ Pass (Enter Reviewer Selection) □ Fail (Notify Author Revision)
Handling Editor Confirmation: ________________________
Date: ________________________
I, the undersigned reviewer, confirm that I will comply with the following anonymity rules during the peer review process of [Journal Name]:
1.I will not disclose my identity as a reviewer to the author(s) directly or indirectly.
2.I will not attempt to search for or deduce the author(s)’ identity through any channels (preprint platforms, research databases, academic networks, etc.).
3.I will not include any personal information or identity clues in the review report that may reveal my identity.
4.If I accidentally infer the author(s)’ identity and have a conflict of interest, I will immediately notify the editorial office and apply for recusal.
5.I will not discuss the manuscript content or review process with any third parties unrelated to the review.
I understand that any violation of the above rules will result in being removed from the journal’s reviewer database and other relevant disciplinary measures.
Reviewer Name: ________________________
Affiliation: ________________________
Signature: ________________________
Date: ________________________