Immunity's AI Policy: Cell Press Rules for Immunology's Top Journal
Immunity follows the Cell Press AI policy: disclosure goes in STAR Methods under Method Details, AI cannot be an author, and AI-generated images are banned across all Cell Press journals.
Senior Researcher, Oncology & Cell Biology
Author context
Specializes in manuscript preparation and peer review strategy for oncology and cell biology, with deep experience evaluating submissions to Nature Medicine, JCO, Cancer Cell, and Cell-family journals.
Next step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the guide or checklist that matches this page's intent before you ask for a manuscript-level diagnostic.
Among the three highest-impact immunology journals, Nature Immunology, Immunity, and Journal of Experimental Medicine, Immunity occupies a specific niche. It's a Cell Press title, which means it follows a different publisher's AI policy than its Springer Nature competitor. If you've written for Cell, Cancer Cell, or Molecular Cell, you already know the format. If you're coming from a Nature-branded journal, the rules are substantively similar but the mechanics differ: STAR Methods instead of free-form Methods, Cell Press editorial culture instead of Springer Nature's.
The Cell Press AI policy at Immunity
Immunity inherits its AI policy from Cell Press, which applies identically across all Cell Press journals. The rules:
- AI can't be an author. Generative AI tools don't meet authorship criteria, they can't take accountability, interpret results, or approve manuscripts.
- AI use must be disclosed in STAR Methods. Specifically in the Method Details subsection of the Structured, Transparent, Accessible Reporting format.
- AI-generated images are prohibited. No generative AI figures, graphical abstracts, or illustrations.
- Authors are fully accountable. Every co-author must take responsibility for all content, including AI-assisted sections.
- All phases of preparation count. If you used AI during any stage, first draft, revision, language editing, code generation, it needs disclosure.
Cell Press vs. Elsevier: how the policies layer
Immunity is a Cell Press journal, and Cell Press is owned by Elsevier. Two layers of policy exist:
Elsevier's company-wide position covers all ~2,800 Elsevier journals: no AI authorship, mandatory disclosure, author responsibility. Elsevier doesn't mandate a specific disclosure location.
Cell Press adds specificity: STAR Methods placement is required, not optional. Cell Press provides example disclosure language. The editorial team screens actively during review.
Immunity follows Cell Press exactly. No journal-specific modifications. If you know the Cell Press policy, you know Immunity's rules.
This two-layer structure means Immunity's policy is marginally more prescriptive than what you'd find at a non-Cell-Press Elsevier journal. The STAR Methods requirement adds structure that a general Elsevier journal doesn't impose.
Immunology-specific considerations
High-dimensional immune profiling
Immunity publishes cutting-edge immunology that increasingly relies on high-dimensional data: CyTOF (mass cytometry), spectral flow cytometry, CITE-seq, spatial transcriptomics, and multiplexed imaging. These analyses involve complex computational pipelines where AI tool use is becoming common.
The key distinction:
- Research analysis tools (FlowJo, Scanpy, Seurat, CATALYST, CytofRUV): These are described in your standard STAR Methods as part of your research methodology. They don't fall under the AI manuscript preparation policy.
- AI writing/code tools (ChatGPT, Copilot, Claude): If these helped you write analysis scripts, generate code, or edit manuscript text, they require disclosure in STAR Methods under Method Details.
Example of clear separation:
"CyTOF data was preprocessed and analyzed using CATALYST (R/Bioconductor) with clustering performed using FlowSOM (see STAR Methods: CyTOF Analysis). GitHub Copilot (Microsoft) was used to assist with writing custom R scripts for the differential abundance analysis between patient groups. All code was validated by the bioinformatics team (S.K. and L.M.) against manually computed results."
Immune cell illustrations and pathway diagrams
Immunity papers frequently include:
- T cell activation pathway diagrams
- Cytokine signaling network illustrations
- Immune cell differentiation schematics
- Tissue microenvironment cartoons
The rules are clear:
- BioRender, Illustrator, PowerPoint: Fine, no AI disclosure needed
- Midjourney, DALL-E, Stable Diffusion: Prohibited for generating these images
- Hybrid (AI-generated, then refined): Still prohibited
If you aren't sure whether your illustration tool counts as generative AI, stick with BioRender. It's designed for scientific illustration and doesn't use generative AI to create images.
Vaccine and therapeutic immunology
Immunity publishes basic science that informs vaccine design and immunotherapy development. If your paper connects fundamental immune mechanisms to therapeutic applications, keep AI away from the translational implication sections. These are where your expertise matters most, and AI-generated claims about therapeutic potential can mislead readers.
Writing the STAR Methods disclosure
For a mechanistic immunology paper:
"During preparation of this manuscript, the authors used ChatGPT (GPT-4, OpenAI) to improve the clarity of the Introduction and Discussion sections. The experimental results, data interpretation, and mechanistic conclusions were generated entirely by the research team. All AI-suggested text edits were reviewed by the corresponding author (A.M.) and senior author (R.S.). The authors take full responsibility for the published content."
For a paper with extensive computational analysis:
"Single-cell RNA-seq data was analyzed using Scanpy (v1.9) and scvi-tools as described in STAR Methods: scRNA-seq Analysis. ChatGPT (GPT-4, OpenAI) was used to improve the language of the Results section. GitHub Copilot (Microsoft) assisted with writing Python scripts for custom trajectory analysis. All analysis code was validated against published reference datasets (see Data and Code Availability). The authors take full responsibility for the content."
For a short paper (Immunity Reports):
"The authors used Claude (Claude 3.5, Anthropic) to edit the manuscript for language clarity. All content was reviewed by both authors. The authors take full responsibility for the published content."
What requires disclosure at Immunity
Use case | Disclosure required? | Notes |
|---|---|---|
Grammar/spell check tools | No | Standard tools exempt |
ChatGPT for language editing | Yes | STAR Methods, Method Details |
AI for scRNA-seq/CyTOF code | Yes | Specify which analysis steps |
FlowJo/Seurat/Scanpy usage | No (research tools) | Standard STAR Methods |
AI-generated immune cell diagrams | Prohibited | BioRender is fine |
AI for figure legends | Yes | Part of the manuscript |
AI for statistical code | Yes | Confirm independent validation |
AI for literature organization | Yes | Describe scope |
AI for graphical abstract design | Prohibited if generative | Use standard illustration tools |
AI to edit reviewer response letter | Not strictly required | The letter isn't published |
The reviewer response letter point is an edge case. Cell Press doesn't explicitly require disclosure of AI use in revision response letters (these aren't part of the published manuscript). But if AI helped you rewrite significant portions of the manuscript during revision, update the STAR Methods disclosure to reflect this.
Timeline and policy stability
Cell Press formalized its AI policy in early 2023, shortly after ChatGPT's widespread adoption:
Date | Development |
|---|---|
January 2023 | Cell Press publishes editorial addressing AI tools and authorship |
Early 2023 | Formal AI policy added to author guidelines across all Cell Press journals |
Mid 2023 | Policy refined with clearer STAR Methods disclosure guidance |
2024 | Elsevier aligns company-wide policy; Cell Press policy unchanged |
2025–2026 | Policy stable; enforcement integrated into editorial workflow |
The Cell Press policy has been more stable than some competitors. Science (AAAS) initially banned all AI-generated text before switching to a disclosure model. Cell Press started with disclosure from the beginning and hasn't changed course. This consistency is helpful for immunology labs running long-term projects, the rules you follow today are the same rules you'll face when you submit next year.
Consequences of non-disclosure
Cell Press enforcement follows the standard process:
During review:
- Editor contacts corresponding author
- Disclosure must be added to STAR Methods
- Deliberate concealment can lead to rejection
After publication:
- Correction for minor language editing non-disclosure
- Expression of concern if AI affected data interpretation
- Retraction for fabricated content or false claims
- COPE investigation for systematic issues
Immunity's community dynamics: Immunity publishes approximately 150-200 research articles per year. The journal's editorial board and reviewer pool overlap substantially with Nature Immunology and JEM. A publication ethics flag at Immunity doesn't stay contained, it becomes known across all three major immunology journals.
Comparison with other immunology and Cell Press journals
Feature | Immunity | Nature Immunology | JEM | Cell | Journal of Immunology |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Publisher | Cell Press (Elsevier) | Springer Nature | Rockefeller UP | Cell Press (Elsevier) | AAI (Oxford UP) |
AI authorship | Prohibited | Prohibited | Prohibited | Prohibited | Prohibited |
Disclosure location | STAR Methods | Methods | Methods | STAR Methods | Methods |
AI image ban | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Copy editing exemption | Implicit | Yes (explicit) | Yes | Implicit | Yes |
Impact factor range | ~25-30 | ~25-30 | ~15 | ~45-65 | ~4-5 |
Peer review style | Confidential | Confidential | Confidential | Confidential | Confidential |
The STAR Methods distinction means Immunity and Cell have the same formatted disclosure structure, while Nature Immunology and JEM use free-form Methods sections. If you're preparing manuscripts for multiple journals simultaneously, note which format you need, STAR Methods has specific subsections (Key Resources Table, Resource Availability, Experimental Model and Study Participant Details, Method Details) that don't apply at non-Cell-Press journals.
Practical advice for Immunity submissions
For high-dimensional data papers:
- Separate research software (Seurat, FlowJo, CATALYST) from AI writing tools in your STAR Methods
- If AI helped with dimensionality reduction visualization code, say so, but clarify that the biological interpretation of clusters was done by the investigators
- Deposit all analysis code in a public repository
For mechanistic studies:
- AI can polish your writing, but the mechanistic model or signaling cascade interpretation should be your own
- Don't use AI to generate hypothetical mechanisms in the Discussion, Immunity's reviewers are domain experts who will recognize generic AI-generated immune mechanism descriptions
For translational immunology:
- Keep AI away from sections discussing therapeutic implications
- If your paper bridges basic immunology with clinical applications, the clinical relevance assessment should come from the investigators, not an LLM
For all submission types:
- Draft the STAR Methods AI disclosure during writing, not after
- Make sure all co-authors review the disclosure
- If you used AI during revisions, update the disclosure before resubmission
- Check your graphical abstract, BioRender is safe; generative AI isn't
Before submission checklist:
- [ ] AI disclosure in STAR Methods → Method Details
- [ ] Tool names, versions, and specific use cases listed
- [ ] Research tools in standard STAR Methods sections (not AI disclosure)
- [ ] No generative AI images or graphical abstract
- [ ] Analysis code validated and deposited
- [ ] All co-authors reviewed AI disclosure
- [ ] Mechanistic interpretations are human-generated
A free manuscript assessment can help verify your Immunity submission meets Cell Press standards before you submit.
Sources
Reference library
Use the core publishing datasets alongside this guide
This article answers one part of the publishing decision. The reference library covers the recurring questions that usually come next: how selective journals are, how long review takes, and what the submission requirements look like across journals.
Dataset / reference guide
Peer Review Timelines by Journal
Reference-grade journal timeline data that authors, labs, and writing centers can cite when discussing realistic review timing.
Dataset / benchmark
Biomedical Journal Acceptance Rates
A field-organized acceptance-rate guide that works as a neutral benchmark when authors are deciding how selective to target.
Reference table
Journal Submission Specs
A high-utility submission table covering word limits, figure caps, reference limits, and formatting expectations.
Before you upload
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Move from this article into the next decision-support step. The scan works best once the journal and submission plan are clearer.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Where to go next
Conversion step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.