AI Acknowledgement

Journals and conferences / SAGE Publishing

SAGE Publishing AI disclosure statement

Sage splits AI use into assistive (language, grammar, structure help; no disclosure needed), generative (content that affects methods, analysis, results or conclusions; must be disclosed at submission), and prohibited. Undisclosed generative use can lead to rejection at any stage.

Checked against SAGE Publishing's own pages on 9 October 2026 · See the full rules

Write yours

Set to SAGE Publishing's format. Tap what you did and copy the result.

Did you use AI?

Your university or journal

Which AI tools?

What did you use it for?

What did you do with what it gave you?

More details · prompts, date, versions
Authors
During the preparation of this work, the authors used ChatGPT to brainstorm ideas and check grammar and spelling. After using this tool/service, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of the publication.

SAGE Publishing's own wording

"During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [TOOL NAME] to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the publication."

Quoted from SAGE Publishing's guidance. The generator below fills this format in for you.

The rules at a glance

When you need one
When AI produces content such as references, text, images or other material that directly affects methodology, analysis, results or conclusions, e.g. literature review help, translation, AI-generated code, data visualisation, representative illustrations, code checking, reference compilation. Pure language/grammar/structure assistance needs no disclosure.
Framework
Three categories: assistive (no disclosure), generative (disclosure required), prohibited
Where it goes
Disclosed upon submission, within the methods or acknowledgements. A journal guideline version asks for a separate statement titled 'Declaration of Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies' that appears in the published work.
Referencing
Cite original sources, not GenAI tools, as primary sources in references. Citing a GenAI tool may be appropriate when it created images or visualisations as representative contributions. No reference format given.
Must include
  • name of the AI tool
  • version
  • how it was used in producing the work
  • confirmation that authors reviewed/edited output and take responsibility
Also note
  • AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors
  • Submissions are not rejected solely for disclosed GenAI use, but undisclosed inappropriate use can lead to rejection at any time
  • Prohibited: fabricated references or claims, generated images presented as novel research images, GenAI interviews in place of real participants, plagiarism
  • Authors must verify accuracy of all AI outputs and check original sources
  • Reviewers may use GenAI to help write/format reports but must not upload or paste the manuscript into GenAI tools to generate reviews
  • Editors must not use GenAI to generate decision letters or summaries of unpublished research
  • The journal guideline version says AI detection tools may be used as a first check; scores of 50%+ may prompt further editor scrutiny

Sources

Your unit outline or the journal's author guide wins if it says something different. Spotted a change? Tell us.