Publication Frequency and Open Access Policy

• Frequency: The Journal of Anatolian and Balkan Studies (JABS) is a peer-reviewed international journal published biannually (June and December) in both online and print formats.
• Open Access Policy: Aiming to enhance the quality and quantity of scholarly work in its field, JABS adopts a free and open access publication policy.
• Article Processing Charges (APCs): In alignment with this mission, the journal does not charge any fees for article submission, evaluation, or publication. Furthermore, it provides immediate, free, and unrestricted access to all published articles.

PUBLICATION POLICY

1. Submission Standards: Manuscripts submitted for publication in the Journal of Anatolian and Balkan Studies must be prepared strictly in accordance with the specified author guidelines. Authors bear sole responsibility for correcting typographical, grammatical, or factual errors.
2. Ethics Committee Approval: For clinical and experimental studies involving human or animal subjects that require ethical clearance, ethics committee approval must be obtained, documented, and explicitly stated in the manuscript. Information regarding this authorization must be included in the Methodology section, as well as on the first or last page of the article. For case reports, the manuscript must confirm that signed informed consent was obtained from the participants.
3. Ethical Declarations: Authors must explicitly state that the manuscript has been prepared in compliance with research and publication ethics. At the end of the manuscript, authors are required to provide the following statements: Author Contribution Disclosure, Acknowledgements and Support (if applicable), Conflict of Interest Statement, and Financial Support Disclosure. Affirming these declarations is a mandatory requirement during the submission process.
4. Manuscript Withdrawal: Authors may only withdraw their submissions during the "Preliminary Review" (Desk Review) stage.
5. Plagiarism Screening and Peer Review: Prior to referee evaluation, all submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous plagiarism screening. The journal employs a double-blind peer review system; therefore, the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept strictly confidential.
6. Editorial Decision: The final decision regarding the publication of a manuscript is made by evaluating the reviewer reports. In cases where there is a split decision (one positive and one negative report), the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer.
7. Revisions: Manuscripts requiring revisions are returned to their respective authors. Studies that are not revised and resubmitted within the designated timeframe will be dropped from the publication queue.
8. Publication Scheduling: Research that successfully completes the evaluation process is published in the consecutive issue in accordance with the journal's publication schedule.

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

This statement is based on the "Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (2011)" developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (Version 3).

a) Responsibilities of the Editor

The journal editor is responsible for deciding which of the submitted manuscripts will be published. The editor evaluates manuscripts based solely on their relevance to the journal’s scope, originality, and scholarly significance, without regard to the authors' race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The editor must ensure that all personal information regarding submissions remains confidential and is not shared with third parties (excluding reviewers, editorial board members, or publishers). Editors and reviewers may not use unpublished materials or data disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the express written consent of the author.

b) Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers assist the editorial board in making publication decisions and, through editorial communications, may assist the author in improving the quality of the paper. Reviewers must conduct their evaluations in a fair, objective, and constructive manner. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript, or knows that its prompt review will be impossible, must notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process. Reviewers must treat manuscripts received for review as confidential documents; they must not share information or ideas obtained through peer review or use them for personal advantage.

c) Responsibilities of Authors

Manuscripts based on fabricated or fraudulent data are unacceptable. Authors must guarantee the accuracy and originality of their data. If the work involves human subjects, appropriate institutional clearance and informed consent must be obtained and documented. Written permission must be secured from the respective copyright holders for any third-party data collection tools, tables, graphs, maps, or visuals used in the study. During the submission process, the terms accepted by the corresponding author on the Submission Checklist are deemed accepted by all co-authors. All individuals who have made significant contributions to the research should be listed as co-authors. The inclusion of non-contributing individuals as co-authors is unethical and will not be tolerated. Authors are expected to implement reasonable revisions requested by reviewers and editors. Refusal to perform revisions without a justifiable cause will result in the rejection of the manuscript. Authors are obligated to promptly notify the journal editor if they identify significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work so that appropriate corrections or retractions can be made.

References:

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March 7). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf
• Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, Version 3. Retrieved from https://blog.doaj.org/2018/01/15/principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice-in-scholarly-publishing-version-3/

ETHICS COMMITTEE APPROVAL CERTIFICATE (GUIDELINES & FAQ)

Note: Since 2020, TR Dizin Journal Evaluation Criteria have been updated to provide detailed mandates regarding Ethics Committee Approval in scientific research. Manuscripts requiring an Ethics Committee Certificate will not be taken into consideration if the certificate is not uploaded to the system and/or if the necessary ethical information is not provided within the manuscript.

TR Dizin Clarifications Regarding Ethical Rules

FAQ 1: Is an Ethics Committee Approval required for all manuscripts? No. The criteria specifically state that it is mandatory only for manuscripts "requiring Ethics Committee Approval." The types of research requiring approval are listed below:

• Any research conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from participants using surveys, interviews, focus groups, observations, and experimental techniques.
• The use of humans and animals (including materials/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes.
• Clinical trials conducted on humans.
• Research conducted on animals.
• Retrospective studies in compliance with personal data protection laws.

Additionally:

• Case reports must explicitly state that an "Informed Consent Form" was obtained.
• Written permission must be obtained and stated for the use of scales, surveys, or photographs belonging to third parties.
• Compliance with copyright regulations must be stated for the use of intellectual and artistic works.

FAQ 2: Should retroactive Ethics Committee Approval be obtained for publications derived from past studies or theses? Retroactive ethics committee approval is not required for manuscripts that utilize research data collected prior to 2020, studies derived from master's or doctoral theses (which must be explicitly stated in the article), or articles that were submitted to the journal in the previous year, accepted, but have not yet been published.

FAQ 3: Do these TR Dizin regulations restrict submissions from researchers outside of universities? No. Independent researchers who are not affiliated with a university can apply to the regional Ethics Committees in their respective areas.

Mandatory Declarations in Manuscripts

Manuscripts must explicitly state whether ethics committee approval and/or legal/special permission is required. If these permissions are necessary, the name of the institution, the date of approval, and the decision/issue number must be clearly presented within the text.

If the study involves human or animal subjects, authors must declare that the research was conducted in accordance with international declarations, guidelines, and conventions.