The ethical duties and responsibilities of the journal are taken into account in the principles published by the Council of Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Directive and Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

ETHICAL PRINCIPLES FOR AUTHORS



Any responsibility arising from noncompliance with the code of ethics shall belong to the author (s). Actions contrary to scientific research and publication are:

Plagiarism: To show others' original ideas, methods, statements or works as part of or completely their own work without reference to the scientific rules,

Fraud: To use false or falsified data in scientific research,

Distortion: To falsify research records or obtained data, to show that devices or materials not used in the research are used, to distort or shape the research results in the interests of the people and organizations that are supported,

Republication: To present duplicate publications as separate publications in academic appointment and promotion,

Slicing: Presenting the results of a research as separate publications in academic assignments and promotions by disaggregating the research results in a manner that disrupts the integrity of the research and improperly fragmenting and publishing it in multiple publications,

Unfair authorship: To include non-active contributors among writers or to include authors, to change writer rankings in an unjustified and improper way, to remove the names of active contributors from the works in later prints, to include authors using his or her influence when there is no active contribution,

Not specifying the persons, institutions or organizations that support the publications and their contributions in the investigations undertaken with support,

Use of theses or works which have not yet been submitted or defended as a source without the permission of the owner,

Using theses or works which have not yet been submitted or defended as a source without the permission of the owner,

To publish the obtained data from the surveys and attitude research conducted within the scope of a scientific study without the explicit consent of the participants or without the permission of the institution,

To get written permission from the authorized units before starting work in researches and experiments,

To engage in work in research and experiments contrary to legislation or the provisions of international conventions on related research and experiments which Turkey is a party,

Not to use the data and information provided by other persons and institutions in the scientific studies in the extent and in the amount allowed, and not to observe and protect the confidentiality of this information,

Not to comply with the ethical rules in research on humans and animals and not to respect patient rights in their publications.

2) The author(s) are expected to be unique in their work.

3) The author(s) must give complete and accurate reference to all the work they use.

4) They should not send their work they have submitted to our journal to the application process to other magazines at the same time.

5) The author(s) should not send their work published in another journal to our journal.

6) Anyone who contributes to the content of the work should be shown as a writer.

7) For a study in which the evaluation process has begun, transactions such as adding or subtracting writers or changing the order of authors should not be requested but changes such as title and institution can be made.



ETHICAL PRINCIPLES FOR REFEREES

Referees must agree to examine only those items that they have the necessary expertise to evaluate and that they can evaluate on a timely basis.

Referees must be honest, impartial and fair in the evaluation of the articles.

Referees must declare a possible conflict of interest with the author or the article, and should seek advice from the journal if they are unsure of such a possibility. This conflict of interest can be related to a wide range of topics. For example, if the referee finds that he works closely with the author of the article, he must declare it to the journal and withdraw from refereeing. Similarly, if the referee is carrying out a research during the article evaluation process on a topic very similar to that of the submitted article, he/she can report it to the editorial office and withdraw from refereeing.

Referees should inform the journal even if they think they can guess the author of the article.

Referees should not accept reviewing the article merely to take a look at the article without intending to make an evaluation. After seeing the article, withdrawing from refereeing does not match academic ethics principles

Referees must refuse to evaluate the article if they have made a subjective and active contribution to the writing process in any way.

Referees must acknowledge that the evaluation requires a mutual effort and fair observation in a timely manner, and must act accordingly in the evaluation process. For this reason, referees should complete the article evaluation process as soon as possible.

Referees must provide the journal with personal and professional information that accurately demonstrates their expertise.

Referees must follow a neutral, constructive attitude in article evaluations that should be remote from making hostile or accusatory or derogatory personal comments. In a manner consistent with this position, referees should not attempt to intervene to change the author's original narrative to the shaping of articles.

Referees must fill out the article evaluation form completely and prepare a justified report in case of a rejection decision.

Referees should not use the information they have obtained during the refereeing process for the advantage of himself or any other person or institution or use them in a way that would be disadvantageous to others or to disgrace others.

Referees should respect the confidentiality of the review process and keep the details of an article or the evaluation of this article during or after the refereeing process beyond the details published by the journal.

Referees must keep the details of the review process and the evaluation process after the article evaluation process is over.

Referees should not share the information of the work that he/she was assigned to review with others without the owner's explicit permission before it is published.



ETHICAL GUIDE FOR EDITORS

Decisions by editors to accept or refuse an article for publication must be based solely on the value of the essay, its authenticity, its clarity, and its focus and scope.

The editor should initiate the evaluation process for the article submitted without delay.

The editor has full authority and responsibility for accepting or rejecting an article submitted for publication. However, he/she acts based on the opinions of the referees during the decision-making process.

The evaluations are made on the basis of at least two referees' opinions, and in the event of an egalite, a third referee opinion is taken.

Editors should justify their decision and inform the author.

Editors should choose referees who have strong publications in their fields, are bound to ethical values and will not interrupt the publication process of the journal.

When persuasive evidence is submitted to the journal for a previously published article claiming that it has a major scientific error, the editors should ensure that an article emphasizing the error is published or, if possible, corrected.

Any unpublished information, arguments or interpretations made in a submitted article must not be used in the editors' own research without the permission of the author.

If the editors have contributed to the article submitted to the journal, the editorial process of the article is carried out by another editor.

The editor acts according to the guidelines of the Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics in cases where he / she or the referees perceives the acts related to the articles are contrary to the ethical principles of scientific publications