In short
BERA's AI Statement allows generative AI in submissions, including award and funding applications, but requires full disclosure at the point of submission. The disclosure must name the tool and what it was used for. Reviewers and judges must not use free AI tools, and peer review must be human-led.
Requires disclosure. Applicants may use AI and must say where they used it.
For applicants
- Disclose any use of generative AI to support a submission to BERA at the point of submission. Name the tool and say what it was used for. This applies to award and funding applications and to reports from those in receipt of BERA funding. [1][2]
- Disclosures will ordinarily be shared with the relevant judges, and BERA reserves the right to disclose them publicly. Judges are told not to treat applicants unfavourably for declaring AI use. [1]
- Named authors are fully responsible for the accuracy, validity and originality of all content, including AI-assisted content. They must avoid plagiarism, fabricated references and infringement of third-party rights. [1][2]
- Do not use generative AI to fabricate, manipulate, modify or falsify research data or findings. Generative AI cannot be listed as an author. [1][2]
- Do not enter content you do not own into generative AI tools. Free-to-use tools often have no protection over inputs. Proprietary tools may be appropriate if controls are in place. [1]
- Undisclosed or inappropriate AI use may be treated as a breach of the BERA Code of Conduct, and BERA may take action. [1][2]
For reviewers
- Peer review and judging must be a human-led process. Generative AI must not be used to evaluate or make decisions in peer review or judging. [1][2]
- Never upload content under review to free-to-use generative AI tools. Do not use free tools to summarise or evaluate review materials or to draft or edit review reports. [1]
- Proprietary AI tools may be used in a limited and supplementary way to prepare review reports, such as for English-language support, translation or technical assistance, with appropriate controls. The reviewer keeps full responsibility for the content and judgments. [1]
- Judges are asked to focus on the quality, originality, rigour and significance of the submission, and not to treat declared AI use unfavourably. [1]
- The Terms and Conditions say AI tools could be used in the final preparation of referee reports. This use must be acknowledged, with its purpose specified. [2]
Sources
BERA Artificial Intelligence (AI) Statement (opens in a new tab)
Any use of generative AI tools to support the creation of submissions to BERA must be fully disclosed at the point of submission, including specifying the tool used and what it has been used for.
Disclosures are required for the submission of abstracts, award and funding applications, governance applications, journal articles, BERA Blog posts, and reports from those in receipt of BERA funding, and other BERA publications.
BERA reserves the right to publicly disclose these.
We will ordinarily share the AI disclosure with the relevant judges, where appropriate, recognising that there is acceptable use of AI, providing it is declared, and disclosure and transparency is ethical best practice.
Named authors are fully responsible for verifying the accuracy, validity and originality of all content within their submission, including content produced or assisted by AI.
Generative AI must not be used to fabricate, manipulate, modify or falsify research data or findings, including images and photographs.
Therefore, no content which you are not the owner of should be entered into generative AI tools.
Proprietary tools* may be appropriate for use provided controls to avoid this are in place.
Peer review must be a human-led process.
Generative AI must not be used to evaluate or make decisions on peer review or judging processes.
Reviewers must not use free generative AI tools to summarise or evaluate review materials, or draft or edit review reports.
Proprietary AI tools may be used in a limited and supplementary capacity to prepare review reports, such as for English-language support, translation or technical assistance, provided appropriate controls are in place.
The reviewer retains full responsibility for the content and judgments expressed.
The focus of judging should be the quality, originality, rigour, and significance of the submission.
Any undisclosed or inappropriate use of AI tools, particularly for the generation of content presented as original, may be considered a breach of the BERA Code of Conduct , and BERA reserves the right to take appropriate action.
Any content under review, including manuscripts and supplementary materials, must never be uploaded to free-to-use generative AI tools.
Terms and Conditions (opens in a new tab)
If an individual has used generative AI to create a submission for BERA, this must be acknowledged upon submission.
As such, no form of peer review or judging can be executed via an AI tool.
Having said that, AI tools could be used in the final preparation of referee reports although this must be acknowledged including specifying what purpose (e.g. to improve language style).
Should we identify any undisclosed use of generative AI tools for content generation, BERA reserves the right to take action under the Code of Conduct.
The named researcher is fully responsible for the accuracy of any information and correctly referencing any citations.
AI must not be used to artificially create or modify core research data.
See British Educational Research Association (BERA)'s 2 open programs
This page summarizes what the funder has published and is not legal advice. Policies change, and one solicitation can add its own rules. Confirm against the funding announcement before you apply.