Doctoral Programs Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools Policies

As doctoral students and DSW practitioner-scholars, it is critical to uphold integrity and ethics in research, scholarship and practice. This includes locating, reading, understanding and critically assessing credible research evidence; collecting, interpreting and analyzing data; and generating original writing that discusses, contextualizes and reports on findings. While AI-powered tools can be useful in some situations, there is also the potential for AI to compromise scholarly integrity. In accordance with the School of Social Work’s Guiding Principles for the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence, the purpose of this policy is to provide clarity about uses of AI that are acceptable, unacceptable and possibly acceptable (with instructor approval) in the DSW Capstone courses.

Acceptable use of AI tools in all Capstone courses is limited to the following:

• Use of reference management software to create a reference list and/or format your references. If your reference management software paraphrases literature, you are still responsible for reading each source independently.
• Use of AI-powered search tools to locate relevant literature. However, you are responsible for reading and understanding any articles or other sources of literature yielded through the search. In addition, reading and engaging with original source articles is essential to rigorous doctoral scholarship, ensuring accurate interpretation of evidence and appropriate attribution of ideas. This practice is especially critical given that an estimated 10-15% of peer-reviewed publications contain errors or inaccuracies (Brewin, 2023).
• AI tools may be used to develop your general knowledge of a particular topic, similar to other non-peer reviewed sources. The key distinction is that while you may use AI tools to advance your own understanding, you are responsible for verifying the accuracy and credibility of information these sources provide and you may not use AI tools to generate text that you submit as part of your course assignments (e.g., the Capstone Project Proposal, IRB Protocol, Capstone Project Final Paper, or reflection papers).

Unacceptable uses of AI tools in all Capstone courses include:

• Use of generative AI to generate text or references for any part of your Capstone Project Proposal, IRB Protocol, Capstone Project Final Paper or other Capstone course assignments.
• Use of generative AI tools to rewrite your own writing for any part of your Capstone Project Proposal, IRB Protocol, Capstone Project Final Paper or other Capstone course assignments.
• Use of generative AI to develop data collection instruments, such as interview guides or surveys.
• Use of AI to assist with data cleaning, coding or qualitative or quantitative data analysis. To clarify, no study participant data should ever be uploaded to a Chatbot or Large Language Models (LLM) without their informed consent.
• Use of generative AI to translate written materials between languages for submission as original work.

There are other potential uses of AI that may be ethical and acceptable for Capstone Project purposes; however, you are required to obtain written approval from your Capstone instructor (who will consult the DSW program director as needed) for any use that is not specifically referenced above. Any use of AI should be transparently disclosed and cited according to academic norms.

The University recognizes that AI-driven assistive technologies—including University-supported speech-to-text, automated captioning, screen readers and electronic note-taking software—are essential tools for ensuring equitable access. To support this, students utilizing AI-based assistive technology for their coursework or research are encouraged to connect with the Office of Accessibility Resources through an interactive process. This collaborative approach ensures that adaptive tools are recognized as approved accommodations when reasonable, upholding both the student’s civil rights and the doctoral program’s commitment to original scholarship as outlined by this document.

Please note that generative AI tools can produce inaccurate, incomplete or misleading information. You are solely responsible for the accuracy and integrity of any work you submit. Misuse of AI constitutes a violation of the University at Buffalo Academic Integrity Policy. Specifically, submitting “a report, paper, materials, computer data or examination (or any considerable part thereof) prepared by any person or technology (e.g., artificial intelligence) other than the student responsible for the assignment” is considered falsification of academic materials.

This policy was developed and approved by the UB School of Social Work Doctoral Programs Committee and Faculty Council and will be reviewed annually.

Brewin, C. R. (2023). Inaccuracy in the scientific record and open postpublication critique. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 18(5), 1244-1253. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10475207/pdf/10.1177_17456916221141357.pdf

Approved April 9, 2026

The landscape of AI in academic work and in social work research and practice is rapidly changing. While AI-powered tools can be useful in some situations, there is also the potential for AI to compromise scholarly integrity. In accordance with the School of Social Work's Guiding Principles for the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence, the purpose of this policy is to provide clarity about uses of AI that are acceptable, unacceptable and possibly acceptable (with advisor/director approval) in all dissertation research and writing (including comprehensive examination essays and dissertations drafts, proposals, associated IRB protocols and final products/presentations). 

The parameters detailed below are intended to serve as a baseline. Due to the highly individualized nature of dissertations (including all dissertation research and writing outlined above), as well as reasonable accommodations for reasons related to disability, language equity and topic of study, alternative guidance may be appropriate. Students must discuss the use of AI directly with their dissertation committees. Any committee-approved modifications or additions to the guidance below should be documented in writing and approved by the PhD Program Director prior to usage.

Acceptable use of AI tools in all dissertation writing is limited to the following:

• Use of reference management software to create a reference list and/or format your references. If your reference management software paraphrases literature, you are still responsible for reading each source independently.
• Use of AI-powered search tools to locate relevant literature. However, you are responsible for reading and understanding any articles or other sources of literature yielded through the search. In addition, reading and engaging with original source articles is essential to rigorous doctoral scholarship, ensuring accurate interpretation of evidence and appropriate attribution of ideas. This practice is especially critical given that an estimated 10—15% of peer-reviewed publications may contain errors or inaccuracies (Brewin, 2023).
• AI tools may be used to develop your general knowledge of a particular topic, similar to other non-peer reviewed sources. The key distinction is that while AI tools may be used to advance your own understanding, you may not use AI tools to generate text that you submit as part of your comprehensive essays/dissertation proposals/drafts, manuscripts, associated IRB protocols and final products/presentations.
• Use of artificial intelligence tools is permissible when AI systems constitute the object of study or are integral to the approved research design. Note that this does not void the other guidelines herein, however, and that the AI procedures should be developed in accordance with the student’s faculty advisor/dissertation chair, in consultation with the PhD Program Director as needed. Any use of AI should be transparently disclosed and cited according to academic norms.

Unacceptable use of AI tools in all dissertation writing includes:

• Use of generative AI tools to generate any text or to rewrite text for your dissertation writing (including comprehensive essays/dissertation proposals/drafts, manuscripts, associated IRB protocols and final products/presentations).
• Use of generative AI to translate written materials between languages for submission as original work without written approval.
• Uploading confidential data into AI to analyze and interpret any confidential data (study participant data, health records, etc.) in AI without expressed, advance approval by the IRB and student's faculty advisor/dissertation chair.
• Use of generative AI to develop data collection instruments, such as interview guides or surveys.

The University recognizes that AI-driven assistive technologies—including University-supported speech-to-text, automated captioning, screen readers and electronic note-taking software—are essential tools for ensuring equitable access. To support this, students utilizing AI-based assistive technology for their coursework or research are encouraged to connect with the Office of Accessibility Resources through an interactive process. This collaborative approach ensures that adaptive tools are recognized as approved accommodations when reasonable, upholding both the student’s civil rights and the doctoral program’s commitment to original scholarship as outlined by this document.

Please note that generative AI tools can produce inaccurate, incomplete or misleading information. You are solely responsible for the accuracy and integrity of any work you submit.

Misuse of AI constitutes a violation of the University at Buffalo Academic Integrity Policy. Specifically, submitting “a report, paper, materials, computer data or examination (or any considerable part thereof) prepared by any person or technology (e.g., artificial intelligence) other than the student responsible for the assignment” is considered falsification of academic materials (see: https://www.buffalo.edu/grad/succeed/current-students/policy-library.html#academic-integrity).

This policy was developed and approved by the UB School of Social Work Doctoral Programs Committee and Faculty Council and will be reviewed annually.

Brewin, C. R. (2023). Inaccuracy in the scientific record and open postpublication critique. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 18(5), 1244-1253. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10475207/pdf/10.1177_17456916221141357.pdf

Approved May 7, 2026