This section summarizes the Annali d’Italianistica policy on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in academic research and publication. It is intended especially for authors who use digital tools during the preparation of manuscripts. In brief, it consists of the following requirements:
- Authors must clearly disclose any use of AI tools in drafting or revising the manuscript (whether text or images).
- All content generated or modified by AI must be manually verified by the author.
- AI may support technical tasks (e.g., transcription, translation, corpus analysis), but it must not replace critical interpretation.
- AI-generated content must neither include unverifiable quotes or data, nor replace primary or secondary sources.
AI Policy for Annali d’Italianistica
1. Scope and Purpose
This policy governs the use of AI tools-such as generative text models, automated translators, transcription software, and data mining systems-in manuscripts, peer review, editorial decisions, and publication processes, ensuring scholarly rigor, transparency, and alignment with the journal’s mission to advance Italian literature and culture studies. Adapted to both Italian and English contributions, it maintains consistency with Annali’s bilingual and humanistic scholarship https://annali.org/publishing/.
2. Author Responsibilities
- Disclosure: Authors must explicitly declare any AI-assisted creation-e.g., “This section was generated or significantly revised using [tool name]” in the manuscript.
- Originality and Attribution: AI use does not exempt authors from intellectual ownership. All content produced, altered, or assisted by AI must be accurately cited, with proper attribution and clear boundaries of responsibility.
- Verification: Authors must bear full responsibility for verifying factual accuracy, citations, and translations generated by AI tools.
- Ethical Use in Humanities Research: AI may aid philological analysis, archival transcription, or digital humanities methods, but authors must discuss limitations (bias, error) in a dedicated methodological note.
3. Peer-Review and Editorial Processes
- Reviewer Awareness: Reviewers will be informed of any AI involvement and may adjust their evaluation criteria accordingly (e.g., focus on accuracy, human interpretation).
- Ethical Oversight: Editors should monitor AI use to prevent misuse-e.g., undisclosed fabrication, lack of critical context, or plagiarism.
- Training and Guidelines: The editorial board will periodically review best practices for AI application in humanities scholarship, particularly focusing on pedagogical, theoretical, and archival concerns.
4. Publication Transparency
- AI Acknowledgement: If AI contributes substantively to scholarly insights (e.g., corpus analysis), authors should describe its methodological role and limitations in the main text. Possibilities include:
- Tools used (e.g., ChatGPT vX),
- Tasks performed (translation, transcription, drafting),
- Extent of use (e.g., “introductory draft,” “data visualizations”),
- Human role (editing, interpretation, verification).
5. Limitations and Prohibited Practices
- No Replacement of Human Scholarship: AI must not replace critical interpretation, scholarly judgment, or the responsible archival and philological work championed by the journal.
- Verification Mandate: Automatically generated or translated quotations-especially from Italian literary texts-must be cross-checked against authoritative sources.
- No Fabrication: AI-generated claims, citations, or archival data not grounded in verifiable sources are strictly prohibited.
6. Ongoing Review
This policy will be reviewed annually to reflect:
- Advances in AI tools,
- Developments in digital humanities methodologies,
- Community feedback and emerging ethical standards.
