Artificial Intelligence (AI) Ethics Policy

The Journal of Young Sport Academy is committed to the principles of integrity, transparency, and accountability in scholarly publishing. While we acknowledge the role of emerging technologies in academic research, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools must be governed by strict ethical boundaries. Our policy is aligned with the guidelines provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

  1. Ethical Obligations for Authors
  • Authorship Status: AI tools (such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, etc.) cannot be listed as an "author" or "co-author." Authorship implies legal and ethical responsibility for the work, including the ability to provide conflict of interest statements and take accountability for the study’s integrity—tasks that only human authors can fulfill.
  • Disclosure and Transparency: If AI tools were utilized in any part of the manuscript preparation (e.g., data analysis, text generation, language editing, or image creation), this must be clearly disclosed in the "Methods" or "Acknowledgements" section. The disclosure must include the name of the tool, the version used, and the specific purpose of its use.
  • Accountability: Authors are solely responsible for the accuracy of all information, the validity of citations, and any potential plagiarism in the manuscript. Errors or "hallucinations" (fabricated data/references) produced by AI are the responsibility of the human authors and cannot be attributed to the software.
  1. Confidentiality and Ethics for Reviewers
  • Confidentiality Breach: Manuscripts and raw data submitted for review are confidential documents. Reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading any part of a manuscript to public or free-of-charge AI platforms (e.g., ChatGPT). Such actions constitute a violation of the author’s intellectual property rights and the principle of confidentiality in the peer-review process.
  • Original Assessment: Peer-review reports must reflect the reviewer’s own expertise, critical thinking, and original insights. Reports generated primarily or entirely by AI are not acceptable.
  • Disclosure: If a reviewer uses an AI-assisted tool for language refinement in their report, they are obligated to inform the editor.
  1. Editorial Processes and Decision-Making
  • Human-Centered Decisions: Acceptance or rejection decisions in our journal are never based solely on software or AI algorithms. The final publication decision always rests with the editors and subject-matter experts.
  • Data Security: Editors utilize only "closed-loop" (Enterprise) secure systems for technical checks (e.g., plagiarism detection, technical screening) that do not use the submitted data to train external models.
  • Ethical Auditing: The editorial team reserves the right to use technological tools to detect AI-generated suspicious content or manipulated images and may request clarification from the authors when necessary.
  1. Violations and Sanctions

Failure to disclose the use of AI or the unethical use of such tools (e.g., data fabrication, breach of confidentiality) is considered a violation of publication ethics. In such cases, the journal will follow the relevant COPE flowcharts, which may result in the rejection of the manuscript or a formal retraction if the article has already been published.

 

This policy is reviewed periodically to remain current with technological advancements and international publication ethics standards.

Last Updated: 2026/03/21