You used AI somewhere in this paper. Does your journal know that yet?
Submissions are up more than 40 percent since ChatGPT arrived. More than half of this year's AI-related retractions involved an author who didn't think they'd done anything wrong. Six major publishers — representing over 11,700 journals between them — now have a policy on this.
The question isn't whether to disclose. It's whether you know what you're disclosing, and where it goes.
This free interactive checklist walks you through four steps. Identify every place AI touched your process, from light editing to full drafting to conducting your literature review for you. See exactly where six major publishers want that disclosure to go, with direct links to their current policies. Verify the parts most likely to get a paper retracted — citations that don't exist, claims no one checked. Then draft your own disclosure statement, ready to drop into your methods section.
You'll finish knowing exactly what to disclose, where it goes, and whether the sentence you're about to submit is still one you could defend without the tool.
I've seen the shift as a peer reviewer. I know exactly where this goes wrong.
I'm Jessica Diehl, PhD —academic writing consultant, researcher, and advocate for inclusive science
I've published 25+ journal papers
I've peer-reviewed 100+ manuscripts for 40+ journals
I still actively publish and review —I know what reviewers want to see (and what makes them "reject")
I've worked with researchers across a dozen countries and nearly every continent
