American Journal of Political Science requires named AI disclosure, bars AI from peer review confidentiality

The American Journal of Political Science (AJPS), the flagship journal of the Midwest Political Science Association, published a revised AI policy for authors and reviewers on 11 August 2026, replacing a version dated June 2025. The editors wrote on the AJPS Editor Blog that the update follows "months of ongoing dialogue" with other journal editors, publisher Wiley, and the wider scholarly community, and that the policy will keep evolving as AI norms shift.

The policy itself, posted separately as the "AJPS AI Policy," sets specific requirements rather than a general statement of principle. Authors must disclose any AI use that shaped a manuscript, naming each tool, its provider, and where available its version and approximate dates of use, in a single footnote statement mirroring an Author Questionnaire submitted through Editorial Manager. The policy distinguishes uses that directly shaped research content (data collection, analysis code, drafted text) from uses that only supported writing (proofreading, formatting, citation checking), and asks for fuller description in supplemental materials when AI use is extensive. Failure to disclose is, in the policy's own words, "itself grounds for decline." Generative AI tools cannot be listed as manuscript authors, and authors remain fully responsible for verifying every AI-assisted citation, quote, and statistical claim.

For reviewers, the policy is more restrictive: manuscripts under review are confidential, and Wiley policy prohibits uploading them, in full or in part, to any AI tool. Reviewers may use AI to organize their own thoughts or improve the clarity of a review, and must disclose when AI assisted with drafting.

Analysis: AJPS ranks 16th of 322 journals in Political Science by 2025 Journal Citation Reports impact factor, per its own masthead, so a policy this specific from a flagship journal is likely to become a reference point for other political science outlets drafting their own rules. The reviewer confidentiality clause is the sharper of the two halves: it closes off the single most tempting AI use case, dropping a manuscript into a chatbot for a fast read, rather than leaving it to reviewer discretion.

What to watch: whether the "grounds for decline" disclosure requirement is actually enforced in practice, since the policy relies on author self-reporting with no described verification mechanism.

Sources: American Journal of Political Science, https://ajps.org/ajps-ai-policy/ and https://ajps.org/2026/08/11/revised-ajps-artificial-intelligence-ai-policy-for-authors-and-reviewers/