The publishing process

Responsible research

The purpose of the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research is to guide institutions and researchers in responsible research practices. The Code promotes integrity in research for researchers and has broad relevance across all research disciplines.

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) in their Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing and publication of scholarly work in medical journals (ICMJE Recommendations) recommend that authorship be based on the following four criteria:

• substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work
• drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content
• final approval of the version to be published
• agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Always refer to the journal's instructions and follow any specific requirements they may have.

Related UQ policies and procedures

• Responsible Research Management Framework Policy
• Authorship Procedure

Scientific misconduct

Improper conduct of research is reported in Retraction Watch.

Australian cases of scientific misconduct

• During 1981, Michael Briggs, professor of endocrinology at Deakin University, Geelong, forged data on oral contraceptives. His deception caused concern over the safety of up to two million women in Britain and ten million worldwide.
  • Details: Martin, B. (1989) Fraud and Australian Academics. Thought & Action, 5(2), 95-102.
• In 1988, William McBride, director of Foundation 41 in Sydney, NSW forged data on the action of hyoscine in fetal rabbits.
  • Details: Ragg, M. William McBride's penalty. The Lancet, 2(8867), 361-362.

Use of generative artificial intelligence tools

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT, can generate meaningful text in response to questions or instructions. It is important to understand the intellectual property and research integrity implications of using these tools as part of your research or writing practice. 

Intellectual property 

Copyright 

The use of AI tools should be in line with the UQ Intellectual Property Policy and not prevent you from licensing your work appropriately. AI-generated content: 

• Is not protected by copyright: Under Australian copyright law, works generated by non-humans are not eligible for copyright protection. This means that any part of your work written by an AI tool is not copyright protected and can be reused by others without recourse. 
• May infringe copyright: AI tools may reproduce chunks of text subject to copyright without an appropriate citation.

Appropriate uses of AI could include using an AI tool to generate code that you intend to iterate on and develop or, publish under an open software license. In this case, the lack of copyright protection is less impactful.

You can email copyright@library.uq.edu.au for further advice.  

Patents 

Only a natural person (an individual or business) is considered an inventor under Australia’s Patents Act and Patents Regulations (based on the 2022 ruling of the Federal Court of Australia). 

This means that using AI to create something that could be patentable may prevent you from patenting the invention. 

You can contact UniQuest for further advice. 

Editorial policies of publishers 

Publishers of scholarly journals are updating their editorial policies around the use of AI tools. Review the publisher’s authorship policy for any journal you are submitting to before including AI-generated content in your paper.  

• Some publishers consider any use of generative AI tools in your submission to be misconduct. Others may limit its use to specific sections of a work such as the Methodology or Acknowledgements. 
• Publishers generally do not permit AI tools to be listed as an author to ensure accountability for the content and the integrity of the work. 

Examples of authorship guidelines   

• arXiv policy on ChatGPT and similar tools 
• Springer-Nature - Authorship 
• Science – Authorship policy 
• Taylor & Francis Editorial Policies on Authorship 

How to acknowledge AI-generated content 

You should always acknowledge sources, including any content from generative AI tools. 

Refer to Cite ChatGPT and other generative AI tools for examples.