Ethical Principles and Publication Policy
Publication Ethics
Journal of Sport for All and Recreation aims to produce, improve, and share knowledge objectively via scientific methods by examining the current improvements related to Sport Sciences with a holistic and inclusive approach.
Scientific works are studies which are concluded as a result of scientific methods and which provide with the application of scientific methods and objectivity. In the process of production of these works, all the components of the publication process; namely, publisher, editor, author, reviewers, and readers must follow the ethical principles. In this scope, Journal of Sport for All and Recreation must also follow the ethical principles of the all components of the publication process in the light of the guides and policies published in the open access by t
he Committee on Publication Ethics, COPE (e.g.
COPE “Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors” and “
COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors”,
ICMJE Recommendations,
CSE White Paper on Publication Ethics,
WAME resources,
WMA policies, and
WMA Helsinki Declaration).
In case manipulated, falsified and fabricated data is determined in the scientific studies which are sent and/or accepted by the journal, the institution(s) for which the author(s) works for will be informed and the study will be rejected. Journal of Sport for All and Recreation has the right to ask for the documents related to the analysis results from the authors according to the feedback given by the editorial board and/or reviewers.
Ethical ApprovalIn the scope of the protection of human and animal rights, the Journal of Sport for All and Recreation adopts the exact convenience principle of national and international ethical rules and principles. In the articles evaluated in Journal of Sport for All and Recreation, Research Ethics Committee Approval is needed for the following items:
• Research conducted in qualitative or quantitative approaches which require data collection from the participants using survey, interview, focus group study, observation, and/or experiment techniques,
• Using humans or animals (including material/data) with experimental or other scientific aims,
• Clinical research on humans,
• Research on animals (Experimental animals used for various exercise programs of aerobic and anaerobic (Mice, Rats etc...)),
• Retrospective studies in accordance with the law on the protection of personal data.
Ethical Responsibilities of the PublisherJournal of Sport for All and Recreation is a journal published in the field of Sport Sciences with the management of publication board or editorial board since 2016. The journal advocates for the publication of scientific studies in adherence to ethical principles and operates on a non-profit basis.
• The publisher who is one of the stakeholders of the scientific study must act in the light of ethical principles.
• The publisher is responsible for using the communication ability without considering personal benefits and for leading the audience correctly.
• The publisher protects all the property rights and copyrights of the articles published in their journal; and assumes the task of archiving each product.
• Individuals must not abstain from contacting the publisher in case they come across an unethical situation.
Ethical Tasks and Responsibilities of the Editors• Rejecting articles which are incompatible with the aim and scope of the journal.
• Considering the original value of the articles, their contribution to the field, the reliability and validity of the research method, the clarity of expression and the aim and scope of the journal.
• Evaluating the articles in the pre-assessment phase as long as there are no serious problems about the submitted articles; considering the suggestions of the Reviewers, not changing the decisions made by previous editor(s) as long as there are no serious problems, providing with constructive criticism.
• Applying double-blind peer review method and evaluation process policies adopted by the journal, keep the identity information of the reviewers confidential, providing with objective and timely evaluation for each article.
• In order to provide with independent peer evaluation,
• In order to achieve peer evaluation independently, reviewers independent from the institutions of the authors are appointed.
• Sending articles for evaluation to the editors and reviewers considering their field of expertise and supporting objective and independent evaluation process.
• Acting in a balanced objective and fair way while the reviewers and editors do their duty without letting any discriminations against gender, religion or political belief or the ethnic or geographical roots of the authors.
• Evaluating the articles according to their content and favoring no authors in that sense.
• Taking necessary precautions and evaluating the presented declarations if any; in order to prevent possible conflicts of interest. In case there is a conflict of interest, Journal suspends the evaluation process of the article until the ambiguity is resolved; in this sense, Journal has the right to demand Research Ethics Committee Approval, Interviewer Consent Forms, and required documents.
• Evaluating sponsored articles or articles on special subjects in the same way with other articles.
• Applying required procedures by adhering to the policies and procedures of the journal in case there is a complaint about the ethical violation. Giving a chance to the authors in order to answer the complaint, and not avoiding applying required sanctions no matter to whom the article belongs to.
• Taking articles with negative conclusions into account.
• Acting responsibly and sensitively about publishing contents such as notice of correction, explanation, apology, and disclaimer.
Ethical Responsibilities of the ReviewersA double-blind peer review is applied in the process of article evaluation in the Journal of Sport for All and Recreation in which author(s) do not know reviewers and vice versa; Reviewers do not contact with authors directly; correction requests are forwarded to author(s) by the editors on the journal management system through article evaluation forms and notes on the original text.
Reviewers who are to evaluate articles submitted to Journal of Sport for All and Recreation must carry the following ethical responsibilities:
• Reviewers must objectively evaluate only the content of the article in a timely manner and must accept articles only about their fields of expertise in order to contribute to the decision-making process of the Editor.
• Reviewers must carry out the evaluation objectively and in strict confidence. As per this principle, they must remove the articles that they have evaluated and must use them after they are published. Nationality, gender, religion, political belief and commercial purposes must not be included in the evaluation process and must not ruin the objectivity.
• When reviewers conclude that there is a conflict of interest – common interest, they must inform the editor and reject evaluating the article.
• Reviewers must conclude evaluation in accordance with the academic etiquette with a constructive and kind use of language; and must avoid libelous and hostile personal comments.
• Reviewers must evaluate the article which they accept to evaluate in the given time.
• Reviewers must reject evaluating articles which resemble to their own article in the writing process or in the evaluation process.
• Reviewers must protect the confidentiality of the information provided by the editor and author; as per confidentiality policy, they must remove the article after evaluation; if any, they must inform the editor about situations against bling judgment policy and reject the offer of evaluation.
• They must be aware of the potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative or author-related or the relations among authors); and if necessary, they must warn the editor.
• They must continue to protect the confidentiality of the study and the evaluation process.
• In case there is a situation which can affect their original comments and feedbacks, they must inform the journal.
• They must try to reply to the demands coming from the journal about revision and re-evaluation.
Ethical Responsibilities of the Authors
The following are the scientific research ethical responsibilities of author(s) who submitted article to Journal of Sport for All and Recreation:
• Author(s) must not submit their articles to Journal of Sport for All and Recreation at if the article was published in another journal or was submitted to another journal.
• Author(s) must send original articles to Journal of Sport for All and Recreation.
• Author(s) must refer to the sources that they use during the production of the article appropriately in the light of ethical principles.
• The individuals who does not contribute to the article must not be included in the article as author(s); changing the author order of the article or adding new authors or excluding an author must not be offered after submitting the article. During submission, the names of the authors must be uploaded to the system by the correspondent author. The Journal Editor Committee do not make any changes on the system.
• Author(s) must inform the editor about the individuals with conflict of interest or common interests for the article that has been submitted.
• In case information about the article or raw data is requested from the authors during the evaluation process, the requested information must be provided by the author(s) to the editor.
• Author(s) must provide documents related to the rights to use data, the approvals related to the research-analyses or the consents of the participant who forms the study groups. Information concerning voluntary participation consent form must be provided in the method part.
• Author(s) must contact the editors and edit or retrieve their content within five days when they realize that there is a problem with their article in the process of evaluation or in the preview process or published in the journal’s electronic environment.
• Author(s) must provide information regarding ethics committee approval of their articles which require quantitative or qualitative data collection such as experiment, survey, scale, interview, observation, focus group study with the name of the ethics committee name, decision date and issue in the first and last pages and in the method part. They must also submit an ethics committee approval document to the system.
• Author(s) must provide evidence (obtaining permission for the use of documents such as scales, surveys and photographs developed by others) that show they pay strict attention to the ethical principles in the process of data collection in the article. In the articles, it must be pointed out that copyright regulations were applied for the research and publication ethics and literary and artistic works. If the research is on humans and animals, it must be pointed out that the research was conducted in accordance with the international declarations, guides etc. (Helsinki Declaration).
• No ethics committee approval is required for the review articles. However, authors must show that there is no requirement for ethics committee requirement in the first, the last and the method part for the articles without ethics committee requirements.
Vulnerable Population Policy
Our journal will not publish research that does not comply with the following policies. The purpose of these policies is to protect vulnerable groups as research participants and to ensure that research is scientifically sound, ethical, and socially beneficial.
• Vulnerable groups research must be conducted in accordance with the WMA Helsinki Declaration, Articles 19 and 20, and approved by an ethics committee decision by the legal authority.
• The study must meet the needs and priorities of the group/individuals in which it is conducted. The case in which the study cannot be carried out outside of these groups and individuals is taken into consideration.
• In research involving vulnerable groups, additional measures to protect volunteers must be documented by researchers/s.
• The journal editor/advisory board may conduct an additional review within the framework of basic ethical principles. Additional information may be requested in addition to ethics committee permissions during the journal review process.
Scientific Quality: The scientific quality of research conducted with vulnerable groups must be in accordance with the standards of the Helsinki Declaration, ICH, and the Human Rights and Biomedicine Convention. This means that the research must be well-designed, the research protocol must be properly implemented, and the methods for compiling and analyzing the data must be valid.
Autonomy Principle: Vulnerable groups and individuals must be protected in terms of informed consent processes that are not based on coercion, pressure, or incomplete information. This includes ensuring that research participants are fully informed about the nature, risks, and benefits of the research, and that they have the right to freely decide whether or not to participate.
Privacy Principle: For the publication of research conducted with vulnerable groups, the confidentiality of participants and the anonymity of data must be ensured. This means that the identities and personal information of research participants cannot be disclosed.
Justice Principle: Research on vulnerable groups must be in accordance with the principles of equality and justice. This means that research should not discriminate on the basis of gender, ethnicity, religious belief, socioeconomic status, or other demographic factors.
Social Benefit: The fundamental criterion is that the interests of the volunteers who participate in the research should take precedence over the social and scientific benefits. It is expected that research conducted with vulnerable groups will provide social benefits.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) policy
Declaration of Generative AI in Scientific Writing
Where authors use generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, authors should only use these technologies to improve readability and language. Applying the technology should be done with human oversight and control, and authors should carefully review and edit the result, as AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete or biased. AI and AI-assisted technologies should not be listed as an author or co-author, or be cited as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans, as outlined in JSAR’s AI policy for authors.
Journal of Sport for All and Recreation (JSAR) embraces new AI-driven technologies that support reviewers and editors in the editorial process, and we continue to develop and adopt in-house or licensed technologies that respect authors’, reviewers’ and editors’ confidentiality and data privacy rights. JSAR will consider content where AI technologies are used. Our approach is one of transparency. Where AI technology has been used this should be clearly described. Editors will consider the suitability of the use outlined. Our approach is in line with organisations including the
World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) and
the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Transparent reporting of AI technologies in content submitted to Journal of Sport for All and Recreation: We expect authors or others who are creating content to disclose and describe use of AI technologies in (a) any content which is submitted to us, (b) any other work by the authors which underpins or is otherwise connected with the content submitted to us, and (c) any key sources which are cited, to the best of the authors’ knowledge.
To ensure transparent declaration of AI, authors should: Include an acknowledgement of AI use in the ‘contributor’ section of written material. If the AI use was in the course of research, a fuller description should be included in the methods section.
Transparent declaration includes a description of:
• What AI technology was used (the name of the technology)
• Why this AI technology was used (the reason for its use)
• How the AI technology was used (what the task of the technology was)
AI Decision
Journal of Sport for All and Recreation will consider whether the way in which AI was used and declared is reasonable and consistent with its publication policies and practice. Content may be rejected or be subject to post-publication changes on the basis of inadequate declaration or on the particular circumstances of its use.
Plagiarism Policy
Plagiarism is a common and serious ethical problem which affects the scientific studies without considering if it is deliberate or not. Consequently, it is unethical and unacceptable as well as it is a crime to publish articles which have similarities with other sources and do not include references for it.
Journal of Sport for All and Recreation takes various precautions to prevent any kind of plagiarism. Similarity Report Programs (Turnitin, İthenticate) are used in order to determine the coinciding and similar text examples of the articles (after the acceptance of the articles). Articles with similarity score of 10% and more are rejected even though they are accepted in the first place. Moreover, publication board can act in accordance with COPE rules when encountered by plagiarism, reference manipulation and data fraud claims and suspicions.
Reporting Situations Against Ethical Principles to the Journal Editor Board
December 30, 2025
Page
588-604
