Generative AI (GenAI) Policy

Generative AI (GenAI) Policy

"The Shield - Research Journal of Physical Education & Sports Science" establishes clear, ethical guidelines for the use of Generative AI (GenAI) in scholarly work. This policy ensures integrity, transparency, and accountability in alignment with the journal’s commitment to advancing sports sciences and its strict adherence to the guidelines and flowcharts set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Definition of Generative AI

Generative AI refers to artificial intelligence systems capable of producing content that mimics human-generated text, images, or data.1 This includes:

  • Language Models (e.g., ChatGPT) used for drafting or editing manuscripts.2
  • Analytical Tools (e.g., machine learning algorithms) for processing athlete performance data.
  • Image Generators (e.g., DALL-E) used for creating figures or training diagrams.3

Acceptable Use and Accountability

The use of GenAI is permitted under strict conditions that ensure human responsibility for the entire manuscript content.

  1. Writing Assistance

Permitted

Limitations & Requirements

Drafting/Editing: AI may aid in language refinement, summarization, and improving grammar (e.g., refining language in a study on coaching strategies).

Scholarly Insight: AI must not replace original human scholarly insight or core arguments on sports pedagogy.
 

Verification: Authors must verify the accuracy of all AI-generated text (e.g., correcting any misstatements about biomechanics or training protocols).
  1. Data Analysis

Permitted

Requirements

Processing Datasets: AI tools may process large or complex datasets (e.g., analyzing GPS tracking data from soccer matches or motion analysis).

Validation: Authors must meticulously cross-check and validate AI outputs against raw data (e.g., validating injury prediction models).
 

Human Interpretation: AI must not replace the human interpretation and derivation of tactical or clinical insights.

Disclosure Requirements and Authorship

Transparency and accountability are mandatory. Authors must comply with COPE’s position on AI tools, which emphasizes human responsibility.4

  • AI Cannot Be an Author: Generative AI tools cannot be listed as an author or co-author as they cannot take responsibility for the integrity and ethical compliance of the work.5
  • Human Responsibility: Human authors retain full responsibility and accountability for all content, including critically reviewing and editing AI-generated material.6
  • Plagiarism and Originality: AI-generated text or images must be original to the manuscript. Submissions undergo plagiarism checks (e.g., Turnitin screening) to detect unoriginal content, including AI-derived material.7

Mandatory Disclosure:

Authors must declare all AI usage in the following sections:

  1. Methods Section: Detail AI tools used for data analysis (e.g., "AI classified training loads using Python’s TensorFlow library").
  2. Acknowledgments: Note AI use for writing support (e.g., "AI tools assisted in language refinement for the final manuscript draft.").
  3. Tools Used: Explicitly specify the AI platform and model used (e.g., GPT-4, MidJourney) and their exact roles.

 

Ethical Considerations and Compliance

  • Data Integrity: Fabrication or manipulation of data (e.g., falsifying VO₂ max results) using any tool, including AI, is strictly prohibited.8 AI-generated data must align with empirical evidence.
  • Citations: Authors must verify all AI-generated citations for accuracy and adherence to the required citation style (e.g., confirming APA 7th edition formatting).9

Compliance: Non-compliance (e.g., undisclosed AI use in a coaching methodology paper) will result in sanctions, including immediate rejection or retraction of a published article, following COPE guidelines.