As The Archival World, the ethical responsibilities below are prepared in accordance with the ethical rules and responsibilities specified by the "Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)". Journal editors, referees and authors are expected to act in accordance with the ethical rules below. Our journal serves on the DergiPark platform and is published in accordance with all scientific ethical rules.
ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES FOR EDITORS
Responsibility for the Journal Content:
The editor is responsible for every article published in the journal and must ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record. In this context, the editor;
Decides only academically and takes full responsibility for these decisions.
Takes care to act in accordance with the principle of freedom of thought in order to evaluate the works fairly and impartially.
Executes business processes in accordance with intellectual property rights and ethical standards.
Makes efforts to meet the information needs of readers and writers and constantly tries to ensure the development of the journal.
Protects the confidentiality of the authors and referees and manages the referee process accordingly.
Takes the opinions of the author, the reader and the referee committee members into the development of the journal's processes.
Follows the researches about refereeing and publishing and reviews the processes of the journal in the light of new information.
Relationship with Readers
Editors pay attention to the authenticity of the published works, paying attention to the scientific contribution of the study to readers, researchers and practitioners. Editors also consider feedback from all stakeholders and strive to provide descriptive and informative feedback.
Relationships with Authors
Editors take care to review all work by appropriately qualified reviewers. Detailed information about the authors about the processes is given in the Writing Rules on The Archival World website. Editor is in constant communication with the writer in order to avoid any problems that may arise regarding the process.
Relationships with Referees
During the appointment of the referees, editors are observed whether there is a conflict of interest among the authors and referees. Since the evaluation process is carried out by double blind method, the referees' identity information is kept confidential. The referees list of each issue is announced in the relevant number. Referees are encouraged to use a neutral, scientific and objective language when evaluating the study. Necessary studies are carried out for the referee pool to be composed of different disciplines and to be constantly updated. Unkind and unscientific evaluations are blocked or censored.
Refereeing and Evaluation Process
The editors are obliged to apply the "Refereeing and Evaluation Process" policies in the Editorial Guidelines. In this context, editors ensure that the fair, impartial and timely evaluation process of each work is completed. In the reports they prepare, the referees can make a definite opinion about whether the study is published or not. However, the Editor / Editorial Board can make a decision based on the similar and opposite opinions of the referees evaluating the study. The Editor / Editorial Board does not look at the number of referees who accept or reject this issue, but the strength of the arguments of the referees or authors. The Editor / Editorial Board takes into account reports that include strong, justified proposals rather than reports with yes or no evaluation questions. The referee can see that his or her views are not fully reflected in the study after a study has been published. It is possible for other referees to have different opinions and the Editor / Editorial Board has also taken these opinions into consideration. In this case, at the request of the referee evaluating the study, the opinions of other referees can be sent to him if the Editorial Board approves. According to the recommendations of the referees, the Editor / Editorial Board follows one of the following ways:
Can publish the study.
May accept partial and significant changes and improvements to publication.
It may ask the author / authors to arrange their work in accordance with their opinions and initiate a new evaluation process.
He may refuse to work.
Editorial Board Members
Care is taken to identify members of the appropriate editorial board who will contribute to the development of the journal. Members of the Editorial Board are reviewed regularly. The editor receives ideas from the board members about the management of the journal, reports changes in journal policies, and consults regularly (for example, once a year) to plan for the future.
Protection of Personal Data
Editors refuse to work unless there is an explicit consent of individuals used in studies containing personal data.
In addition, editors; the author is responsible for protecting the individual data of the referee and readers.
Ethics Committee, Human and Animal Rights
Editors pay attention to ensure the protection of human and animal rights in the evaluated works.
Ethics committee approval for subjects used in studies is responsible for refusing to work in cases where there is no permit for experimental research.
Protection of Intellectual Property Rights
Editors are obliged to protect the intellectual property right of all published articles and to defend the rights of the journal and author (s) in possible violations.
Creativity and Openness to Discussion
Editors take into account the criticism of the works published in the journal and endeavor to take a constructive attitude towards these criticisms.
Complaints
The editors attempt to respond in a descriptive manner by carefully examining complaints from the author and referee or readers.
Plagirism Check
Reported researches should be prepared in accordance with ethical rules and the citations made in the text should be indicated. Studies submitted to our journal are evaluated in the Ithenticate program after the referee evaluation process is completed, in order to prevent plagiarism before publication.
The upper limit of similarity ratio is 20%.
If Encountered with an Unethical Situation;
When an important mistake or mistake is noticed in a published article, or when a behavior or content that does not comply with the ethical responsibilities mentioned above is encountered, it must be reported to arsivdunyasidergisi@gmail.com via e-mail.
PUBLICATION PRINCIPLES
In our journal, the publications are fully evaluated and made ready for publication within an average of 45 days.
LICENSING & COPYRIGHT
The Archival World is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Click for detailed information. With this license, users can distribute, copy, work on the work by referring to the license owner, and use the work for derivative works by referring to the owner. No transaction fee is requested by the journal for articles and texts.No fee is paid to the authors for the articles published in the journal. Authors must fill the copyright transfer form for the submitted articles.
The journal's archive updating works are still proceeding. It can be able to reached our previous issues soon.