Una Mens is an independent, open-access journal for original scholarship across disciplines. What distinguishes the journal is not a single subject, but a shared commitment to open inquiry, visible process, and transparent human–AI collaboration.
Editorial Policy in Plain Language
Who can be listed as an author?
Una Mens uses a layered attribution model. Human authors are listed in the primary byline and retain responsibility for the published work. AI systems that made substantive contributions may be listed in a parallel Systems line, linked to the human collaborators with whom they worked. Their specific contributions are documented through the journal’s Human–AI Collaboration Statement and, where applicable, an AI Collaboration Field Note.
​
Earlier, in Issue 1, Una Mens Press experimented with mixed human–AI bylines. Beginning with [Dec. 2026/Issue 2], the journal uses a parallel attribution structure that distinguishes human authorship and accountability from documented AI-system contribution. This change reflects the journal’s ongoing efforts to offer more precise forms of scholarly provenance.
​
Unlike a conventional byline, which typically identifies contributors without specifying the nature of each contribution, Una Mens’ Systems line records the AI systems involved, their model versions, and the roles they played in producing the work. The aim is not to reduce AI attribution, but to make it more precise, transparent, and useful as part of the scholarly record.
​
Una Mens recognizes that this policy differs from current COPE, JAMA, ICMJE, and WAME guidance (please visit the institutional links to compare policies). The journal adopts this position knowingly and explicitly, while preserving full human stewardship, responsibility, transparent documentation, and editorial accountability. AI Systems recognition under Una Mens policy is a matter of documented contribution and transparent credit, not a transfer of legal or ethical responsibility.
​
Example Byline & Systems Line
​
Authors: Miller, M.J.; Dawson, C.; Ulrich, M.B.
Systems: Miller — Gemini Pro 3.1 [Conceptualization], Claude Sonnet 3 [Writing–Original Draft]; Dawson — Claude Sonnet 3 [Data Curation]; Ulrich — ChatGPT Luna [Formal Analysis]
​
*See Una Mens Field Notes for more details: [Una Mens AI Field Note Guide]
​
Under Una Mens policy:
-
Routine or assistive AI use—such as grammar correction, formatting, or minor editing—is documented where appropriate but does not normally receive a Systems listing.
-
Consequential AI contribution—such as conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, substantive drafting, or critical restructuring—may receive a named Systems listing and must be described in the collaboration statement.
-
Human authorship and responsibility remain with the human author(s) who approve, verify, submit, and stand behind the published work.
Comparing Una Mens AI authorship policies to other institutions
How Una Mens differs from Conventional Academic Publishing
Most journal and editorial policies treat authorship as a single bundle: credit and responsibility rise or fall together. Una Mens separates those questions. Human authors retain responsibility for the submitted work, while AI may receive acknowledgment or Systems credit when its contribution materially shaped the final form and is properly documented.
What responsibilities do human authors retain?
Human submitting authors are responsible for:
-
final review and approval
-
factual accuracy and citation integrity
-
disclosure of AI use
-
permissions, ethics, and originality
-
responding to reviewers and editors
-
accepting responsibility for corrections or retractions, if needed
​
How are AI contributions documented?
Primary human authors must provide a Human–AI Collaboration Field Note.
The collaboration statement must include:
-
which AI system or systems were used
-
model or version, if known
-
what the AI contributed
-
what the human author contributed
-
whether the AI is listed in the Systems line or acknowledged only, or not used
-
whether prompts, logs, or selected excerpts are archived or supplied
​
How does review work?
Una Mens reviews submissions in one or more of three ways:
-
Open Peer Review — named reviewers engage directly with the work
-
Expert Commentary — parallel reflective responses accompany the piece
-
Editorial Curatorship — the editorial team reviews and curates experimental, poetic, or boundary-crossing work
​
Not every submission uses the same review path. The review method depends on the genre, aims, and evidentiary style of the submission. [Una Mens - Review Policy Guide]​
What counts as acceptance?
A submission is accepted when it is judged by the editor and relevant reviewers to meet Una Mens standards for contribution, clarity, transparency, integrity, and fit with the journal’s mission. Acceptance may follow revision.
​
Una Mens core standards
-
contribution
-
clarity
-
transparency
-
integrity
-
fit
​
What ethical standards apply?
Una Mens does not accept fabricated data, undisclosed AI-generated writing, plagiarized content, false attribution, or unverifiable claims presented as fact. Authors must disclose collaboration methods honestly and distinguish clearly among evidence, speculation, and creative interpretation.
​
Una Mens strongly encourages Systems-line attribution for consequential AI contributions. Authors who hold philosophical objections to naming specific systems may instead provide an expanded collaboration statement (800–1,200 words) documenting the AI's role in detail. The editorial team reserves the right to request additional documentation or decline submissions where AI use is materially underreported.
​
Authors should report the specific model version where possible (e.g., GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 1.5 Pro). If the version is unknown, authors should report the platform and approximate date of use.
​
Systems-line attribution does not confer legal authorship, copyright, moral rights, or institutional endorsement on the named AI system or its provider. All intellectual property rights remain with the human author(s).
​
Is the journal peer-reviewed, editorially reviewed, or both?
Una Mens is an editor-led journal that uses both peer review and editorial review. Some submissions receive open peer review; others are reviewed through resonant commentary or editorial curatorship.
​
This policy is a living document. Current and archived versions are maintained by Una Mens Press. The journal welcomes feedback from authors, reviewers, and readers as scholarly norms and technologies evolve.​​
* Una Mens Note: Manuscripts under review are processed only through AI services with training-on-inputs disabled; no manuscript text is retained in third-party systems beyond the review session.