Anasay

These author guidelines will come into effect starting from Issue 34 (2026). For submissions to the September 2026 issue, manuscripts are expected to be prepared in accordance with these rules.

    1. General Principles

For details regarding the journal’s peer-review, publication, ethical standards, and similar policies, the Policies page shall be taken as the basis; for the journal’s scholarly framework, the Aims and Scope page shall be taken as the basis. Submitted studies must be original and must not have been previously published in electronic/print media or submitted for evaluation elsewhere. If the study was presented at a congress/meeting, the name, date, and venue of the event must be stated.

Compliance with reporting guidelines is recommended depending on the type of research: STROBE (observational original research studies), PRISMA/PRISMA-P (systematic review/meta-analysis), SRQR (qualitative research). For reporting sex and gender dimensions, the SAGER guidelines; and for language and clarity of expression, the EASE guidelines may be considered.
Manuscript formatting shall be prepared based on APA 7, within the framework of the journal’s current adaptations.

    2. Submission
Manuscripts are submitted only through the journal’s online system; submissions outside the system will not be evaluated. At the initial submission, the following documents must be uploaded:
Copyright Agreement
Ethics Committee Approval Document
Artificial Intelligence Disclosure Form

    3. Font and Formatting
Turkish Title: Uppercase, Times New Roman 11 pt, bold
English Title: Uppercase, Times New Roman 11 pt
    3.2. Abstract and Keywords
Times New Roman 9 pt, italic, single spacing (1.0)
Abstract: 100–300 words; 3–8 keywords should be provided below.
Turkish (Abstract/Keywords) and English (Abstract/Keywords) are mandatory.
    3.3. Main Text
Times New Roman 11 pt, single spacing (1.0)
Paragraph spacing: 6 pt before – 6 pt after
First-line indent: 1 cm
When possible, the main text should follow the IMRaD structure: Introduction – Method/Methodology – Results – Discussion – Conclusion.
    3.4. Footnotes
Times New Roman 10 pt, single spacing (1.0)
Paragraph spacing: 0 pt before – 0 pt after
    3.5. References
The reference list must be prepared in accordance with APA 7 and arranged alphabetically from A to Z.
Times New Roman 11 pt, single spacing (1.0)
Paragraph spacing: 0 pt before – 0 pt after
Indent: 1 cm
   4. Extended Abstract (Mandatory)
Before the Introduction section, the manuscript must include an English extended abstract between 650–750 words. The extended abstract should present the aim, problem/research question, method, main findings, and conclusions in more detail than the “abstract,” and must not include findings/interpretations/conclusions that are not included in the main text. If possible, it should follow the flow of Aims and Scope – Method – Findings – Conclusion. The Turkish equivalent of the extended abstract must be uploaded to the system as a supplementary file.                
   5. Section Structure
   5.1. Introduction
The introduction should proceed from general to specific, presenting the context, selectively summarizing the literature, and clearly demonstrating the research gap/deficiency. At the end, the aim, research questions/hypotheses, and the study’s original contribution should be stated; detailed findings should not be provided.
    5.2. Method/Methodology
The Method/Methodology should explain the research approach, the rationale for the study area/sample, data sources, and the steps of data collection and analysis. Software/tools/scales/date ranges/parameters must be reported to the necessary extent; ethical and permission information (if any) must be stated.
    5.3. Results
Results should present the data systematically; tables/figures/maps/images should be numbered, titled, and cited in the text. Interpretations and comparisons with the literature should be made in the Discussion section.
    5.4. Discussion and Conclusion
The discussion should evaluate the findings in the context of the literature; it should not be merely a literature summary. Limitations should be stated, and no new findings/conclusions not included in the text should be added. The conclusion should summarize the main findings briefly and clearly in relation to the aims and questions, and should emphasize the original contribution.
    6. Tables, Figures, and Images
Tables and figures are numbered and titled according to the order in which they are mentioned in the text.
    7. Abbreviations, Product Identification, Supplementary Material
Abbreviations must be defined at first use; for product/software/hardware names, manufacturer and location information must be provided. Supplementary materials may be presented in a section titled “Supplementary Materials” after the references.
    8. Ethics Statement
The author(s) declare that ethical rules have been followed, that no data falsification has been carried out, and that the study is not under evaluation elsewhere. Peer review: double-blind. Conflicts of interest, financial support, ethics committee approval, acknowledgements, and artificial intelligence disclosure are arranged according to the study.

See the sample author guidelines: https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines 

                                                                https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/journal-file/31687

This text presents, in a holistic manner, the core principles and practices of ANASAY Journal regarding publication ethics and publication processes.

1. Purpose and Basis

ANASAY Journal aims to ensure that scholarly knowledge is produced and published in line with the principles of accuracy, transparency, and accountability. The Journal places at the center of its publication policy the guidelines of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) for publication ethics and editorial best practices; the recommendations of the ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) on authorship and contributorship responsibilities; the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) classification for declaring contribution roles; and the principles published by the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) for open access.

2. Ethical Principles
2.1. Ethical Principles for Authors
2.1.1. Responsibility, Originality, and Referencing

Author(s) submitting a manuscript to the Journal accept the legal and ethical responsibility for the text they submit. All information, data, visuals, and opinions used in the study must be appropriately cited and listed in the references. If a study has been derived from (thesis, project output, conference paper, etc.) or expanded from a previously produced work, this must be clearly stated.

2.1.2. Conflict of Interest and Funding

Author(s) are obliged to declare any existing or potential conflicts of interest related to the study. If financial support/grants/institutional support have been received for the study, the supporting institution and the form of support must be clearly indicated.

2.1.3. Plagiarism and Similarity Policy

All submissions to ANASAY are screened for similarity/text overlap during the editorial pre-check stage in accordance with the “Similarity Screening and Plagiarism Policy.”. A similarity report does not constitute a plagiarism decision on its own; the final assessment is made by the editors by taking into account the context of the manuscript and the rules of citation and quotation.
Tools Used
• Within the DergiPark infrastructure, a similarity report is obtained via İntihalnet in accordance with the system’s workflow (for every manuscript submitted to the journal).
• Authors are required to upload an iThenticate report as an additional file.
• When deemed necessary, the editors may conduct further screening using iThenticate (Crossref Similarity Check) and/or tools such as Turnitin.
General Thresholds (Editorial Pre-check Criteria)
(The overall similarity rate is evaluated excluding the reference list.)
• Overall similarity upper limit: 20%
• Single-source similarity upper limit: 3% (Editorial discretion may be applied in cases where unavoidable standard wording is required due to the nature of the field.)
Editorial Decision Options (When the Report Approaches or Exceeds 20%)
The similarity report is reviewed in terms of proper attribution and quotation, self-plagiarism, mandatory repetition of methods/standard expressions, and the adequacy of referencing. The following actions may be taken:
1. Return to the author for revision (e.g., improving citations, rewriting, clearly marking quotations, etc.)
2. Desk rejection by the editor (e.g., suspected ethical misconduct, extensive overlap, failure to provide appropriate references, etc.)
3. Referral to the Editorial Board/Ethics review (e.g., borderline cases, suspicions, repeated violations, etc.)
Serious Misconduct
In cases of clear plagiarism, fabricated/misleading citation, systematic self-plagiarism, or unauthorized use of images/tables, the editors may take action in line with COPE guidance, including rejection, notifying the relevant institution when appropriate, and initiating retraction/correction procedures.
Editorial Discretion
The stated percentages do not imply automatic acceptance or rejection. The editors reserve the right to request revisions or reject a manuscript whenever ethical concerns are identified, even if the similarity rate is low.


2.1.4. Multiple, Redundant, or Simultaneous Publication

The same study cannot be submitted simultaneously to more than one journal. Resubmitting a previously published study to another journal in a manner that substantially overlaps is unethical. Exceptions for secondary publication and conditions for overlapping publication are evaluated within the framework of ICMJE recommendations.

2.1.5. Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

If artificial intelligence tools have been used in the writing of the text, the production of visuals/graphics, or data collection–analysis processes, author(s) must clearly state how they were used in the relevant section, in accordance with the principle of methodological transparency. Author(s) are fully responsible for the content, including parts generated by an AI tool. ANASAY adopts COPE’s approach on “Authorship and AI Tools” and requires the relevant declarations/forms to be uploaded to the system during submission.

2.1.6. Authorship Criteria and Contribution Statement

All individuals listed as authors in ANASAY must meet all authorship criteria recommended by the ICMJE. According to the ICMJE, authorship is based on the joint fulfillment of the following four conditions:

Substantial contributions to the conceptualization or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work.

Drafting the work or critically revising it for important intellectual content.

Final approval of the version to be published.

Agreeing to be accountable for all aspects of the work in order to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Within this framework, each author should not only assume responsibility for the parts to which they contributed, but should also be able, to a reasonable extent, to identify which parts of the work other authors are responsible for. This approach ensures that contributions are recognized accurately and appropriately and that the integrity of the scholarly record is maintained.

Authors may declare their individual contributions during submission using CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy). The contribution statement compiled by the corresponding author is expected to be approved by all authors. The contribution statement is published together with the final article and must accurately reflect contributions to the work.

Individuals who do not meet all four authorship criteria should not be included as authors; their contributions should be acknowledged transparently in an appropriate section of the article (e.g., Acknowledgements).

2.1.7. Suspicion of Ghost/Honorary/Gift Authorship and Procedure

If the editorial board detects indications of ghost, honorary/guest, or gift authorship, the submission may be suspended. In such cases, the relevant COPE flowcharts and authorship/contributorship policies are followed.

2.1.8. Language, Style, and Academic Respect

Falsification in the information and documents used; expressions that demean individuals/institutions; hate speech; or expressions that denigrate religious and national values are incompatible with academic publication ethics. Criticism must be evidence-based and expressed in an academic style.

2.1.9. Ethics Compliance Statement, Corrections, and Retraction

Articles must include a statement indicating compliance with “Research and Publication Ethics.” If author(s) notice a significant error or a suspicion of ethical misconduct in a published work, they are obliged to inform the editorial office immediately. Where necessary, cooperation with the Journal is essential in publishing corrections or in retraction processes.

2.2. Ethical Principles for Reviewers
2.2.1. Impartiality and Objectivity

Peer-review assessments are based on the intellectual content of the work. Personal criticism directed at the author is not appropriate. Manuscripts are evaluated according to their scholarly quality, independently of the authors’ identity characteristics.

2.2.2. Confidentiality and Prohibition of Use

Manuscripts sent to reviewers are confidential documents. They cannot be shared with third parties without editorial approval; the content of an unpublished work cannot be used in another work without the author’s permission.

2.2.3. Diligence, Reasoned Report, and Contribution to the Literature

Reviewers should present their critiques with clear, reasoned, and constructive arguments. Where deemed necessary, they should contribute to improving the quality of the manuscript by pointing to published studies relevant to the topic.

2.2.4. Timeliness and Reporting Ethical Misconduct

Reviewers must complete their evaluation within the allotted time; if this is not possible, they should inform the editor in a timely manner. Plagiarism, data manipulation, or other unethical situations detected during review must be reported to the editorial office immediately.

2.3. Ethical Principles for Editors

ANASAY editors act in accordance with COPE’s ethical duties and responsibilities for editors and within the framework of best practices.

2.3.1. Equality, Confidentiality, and Editorial Diligence

Submissions are taken into evaluation without any discrimination. The peer-review process is conducted confidentially. Editors have the authority to reject manuscripts they consider ethically or scientifically problematic or to request revisions.

2.3.2. Conflict of Interest and Reviewer Management

If there is a conflict of interest between the editor, author, and reviewer, the editor takes the necessary measures; ensures appropriate reviewer selection and process communication. The confidentiality of reviewer identities is protected.

2.3.3. Allegations of Misconduct and Investigation

In cases that raise suspicion of ethical misconduct, editors conduct an objective and rigorous review by following COPE flowcharts. Once investigation processes are concluded, the parties are appropriately informed.

2.3.4. Protection of Intellectual Property

Editors are responsible for protecting the intellectual property rights of published content and for evaluating potential allegations of infringement.

2.3.5. Complaints and Appeals

Complaints and appeals from authors, reviewers, or readers are handled on the basis of scholarly content and in line with COPE guidelines. The final decision is made by the editor-in-chief.

To report an unethical situation to the Journal: anasaydergisi@hotmail.com

4. Archiving Policy

To ensure preservation and permanent access to all works published in ANASAY, content is stored within the DergiPark infrastructure. Authors are also advised to archive the final versions of their articles in institutional/thematic repositories compatible with open archive standards. Our Journal uses the LOCKSS system. Authors are advised to store the final versions of their articles in open repositories that comply with Open Archives Initiative standards.

5. Open Access Policy

ANASAY adopts an open access policy and supports the principles of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI). According to BOAI, open access means that peer-reviewed scholarly literature is accessible via the internet without financial, legal, and technical barriers; can be read, downloaded, copied, distributed, printed, searched, linked to the full text, indexed, and used for any lawful purpose. ANASAY aims to make scholarly knowledge accessible to wider audiences and to increase scholarly visibility. Within this scope, articles published in the Journal are made available online free of charge.

6. Permission Policy

As of the first issue in 2017, the Journal’s content has been licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 International License.
Under this license, users may share, adapt, reproduce, and distribute the Journal’s content for non-commercial purposes, provided that they appropriately reference the original author and the Journal.

7. Advertising Policy
ANASAY Journal does not accept advertisements on its website or in any of its publication platforms (print/digital). Therefore, no advertising space is sold, and applications or requests for advertising are not accepted or considered.

8. Disclaimer

The statements, comments, and evaluations contained in articles published in the Journal belong solely to the respective author(s) and do not reflect the views of the editors, the editorial board, and/or the publisher. The editors, editorial board, and publisher are neither obliged to adopt nor endorse the views put forward in the articles, nor can they be held responsible for the claims, comments, or conclusions in the content. Ensuring the scientific accuracy of the work, research integrity, and that the views expressed in the text belong to the author(s) is the responsibility of the author(s). The Journal management provides a publication platform within the framework of peer-review and publication processes so that scholarly works can be shared with the academic community.

6. References and Links (For detailed information on the subject, see)

1. COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (PDF)
2 COPE – Authorship (Discussion document)
3. COPE – Ghost, guest or gift authorship in a submitted manuscript (Flowchart)
4. COPE – Handling changes to authorship lists (Position statement)
5. ICMJE – Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors
6. ICMJE Recommendations (PDF)
7 CRediT – Contributor Roles Taxonomy (NISO)
8. Budapest Open Access Initiative – Turkish translation