AI Policies & Resources
for academic authors
For participants of the workshop Responsible Use of AI for Academic Authors: publisher policies, research guidelines and further reading, with live links and kept up to date.
For participants of the TRESS ACADEMIC workshop Responsible Use of AI for Academic Authors (7 October and 2 December 2026). Last updated: 27 October 2026.
AI policies change often. This page keeps the sources behind your workbook up to date. Before you submit, always read your own journal’s, institution’s and funder’s current rules.
Publisher and publication-ethics policies
- ICMJE — Use of AI in publishing: authors, reviewers, editors (updated January 2026)
- COPE — Authorship and AI tools
- Elsevier — Generative AI policies for journals (incl. the disclosure statement wording)
- Springer Nature (incl. Nature Portfolio) — AI use in manuscript preparation
- Springer Nature — AI use in peer review
- Springer Nature — Announcement of the updated AI policies (10 September 2026)
- Taylor & Francis — AI Policy
- PLOS — Ethical Publishing Practice
- Sage — Artificial Intelligence Policy
- STM Association — Classification of AI use in academic manuscript preparation (2025)
Research guidelines, funders and regulation
- European Commission — Living guidelines on the responsible use of generative AI in research (fourth version, October 2026, PDF)
- DFG — Guidelines on generative models for text and image creation (2023)
- NIH — AI use in research applications (NOT-OD-25-132)
- US Office of Research Integrity (ORI) — Guidance on generative AI (August 2026, PDF)
- European Commission — EU AI Act: transparency obligations under Article 50 (FAQ)
- US Copyright Office — Copyright and AI, Part 2: Copyrightability (2025, PDF)
Citing and disclosing AI
Further reading — the evidence behind the workshop
- Kwon, D. (2025). Scientists split on ethics of AI use. Nature, 641, 574–578.
- Naddaf, M. (2026). AI commonly used in peer review — often against guidance. Nature, 649, 273–274.
- Frontiers Media (2025). Unlocking AI’s untapped potential: responsible innovation in research and publishing. Survey of 1,645 researchers (PDF).
- Oxford University Press (2026). Disclosing AI use in academic research: a global study. Survey of 2,606 researchers.
- He, Y. & Bu, Y. (2026). Academic journals’ AI policies fail to curb the surge in AI-assisted academic writing. PNAS (open preprint: arXiv 2512.06705).
- Retraction Watch (30 June 2025). Springer Nature book on machine learning is full of made-up citations.
- Retraction Watch (16 July 2025). Springer Nature to retract the book.
- Retraction Watch (4 August 2025). Springer Nature retracts the book: 25 of 46 references unverifiable.
- Liang, W. et al. (2023). GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers. Patterns, 4(7).
- Angelier, V. (2026). The pitfalls of AI detection in academic writing. AI and Ethics, 6(5).
- Springer Nature (2024). Geppetto and SnappShot: AI tools to protect research integrity.
- Hidden prompts in manuscripts exploit AI-assisted peer review (arXiv, 2025).
Your one-page summary
This page accompanies the workshop workbook. It lists publicly available sources as of the date above; it is not legal advice, and responsibility for complying with journal, institutional and funder rules remains with authors. © 2026 TRESS ACADEMIC · info@tressacademic.com