Part of AI and Research Practice.
Journal AI policies
What journals actually say about generative AI, for authors and for reviewers, in their own words, with the page each quote came from and the date it was read.
Snapshots held for every source
These quotes are not current, they are dated. Each one is what the cited page said on the date shown beside it. Publishers rewrite these pages without notice and without version numbers. Three moved domain during collection. Follow the live link to see what the page says today, and check it against the archived copy linked beside it. A local snapshot and a SHA-256 hash is held for every source and is available on request, so a reader who wants to verify that the quoted text is what was read can do so without taking it on trust.
Every quote carries whether it was checked. Each one is matched word by word against the stored copy of the page it came from. Not found does not mean the quote is wrong, it means no source held here contains it, which so far has almost always meant the page was never captured or the recorded text is a fragment rather than a full sentence. As of
Two kinds of permission, and one kind of silence. A journal permits an activity explicitly when it says so, and implicitly when it permits without spelling that activity out, either through a disclosure rule that names it or a general permission that lists no activities. No mention means the policy does not address the activity at all.
All journals are coded against the same fourteen-activity scheme, author side only.
Each cell requires a live governing text naming that activity or an unambiguous instance of it.
A general allowance with no named activity populates nothing, which is why silent dominates.
Where texts disagree, a live prohibition wins over a permission elsewhere. Economics, sociology
and psychology were coded on 19 September 2026 and every cell carries the quote it rests on, set
out in ACTIVITY-CODING-EXPANSION.md.