ETHICAL PRINCIPLES AND PUBLICATION POLICIES
1. Open Access Policy
Our journal is published as an open-access journal. All published articles are made freely available to encourage the dissemination and use of research, provided that such use is non-commercial.
2. Copyright Policy
Each submission to our journal must be accompanied by a Copyright Transfer Agreement and an Author Contribution Form. Both forms must be signed and uploaded to the system. This procedure ensures that authors retain the protection of their copyright. Authors are responsible for obtaining permission from the copyright holders for the use of any previously published materials (including figures, tables, images, photographs, illustrations, etc.). All legal, financial, and criminal liabilities arising from copyright issues rest solely with the authors.
3. Article Processing Charges
Our journal does not charge authors any fees at any stage of the submission, evaluation, or publication process.
4. Publication Ethics
Our journal is committed to complying with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and international publication ethics principles. These guidelines are essential for maintaining transparency and inclusivity in scholarly publishing. By adhering to these standards, the journal aims to ensure that the research it publishes is of high quality and meets the ethical expectations of the academic community.
In evaluating manuscripts submitted to the journal, the recommendations of EASE (European Association of Science Editors) and the International Standards for Editors and Authors issued by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) are taken into consideration. The openly accessible guidelines and policies published by COPE—such as Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors—serve as the primary reference framework for editors and authors.
5. Plagiarism and Unethical Conduct
Submitted manuscripts are screened using similarity detection software during the peer review and/or production stages. Authors are therefore expected to comply with research and publication ethics throughout the preparation of their manuscripts. All authors are strongly advised to observe the following principles and to avoid unethical practices that may constitute plagiarism.
Unethical practices that may lead to plagiarism include, but are not limited to:
1. Attempts to manipulate citation metrics by presenting citations to an author’s own work or to a specific journal as if they were independent references, or by artificially inflating citation counts.
2. Reusing parts of the author’s previously published work without proper citation.
3. Segmenting the same dataset into multiple publications (“salami slicing”).
4. Misleading the editorial board by including false or inaccurate information in the research.
In addition to the behaviors listed above, researchers are expected to comply with all international publication ethics and plagiarism standards. In cases of alleged or suspected plagiarism, citation manipulation, data fabrication, or data falsification, the Editor and Editorial Board will follow the relevant COPE flowcharts to ensure that all allegations or suspicions are handled fairly, transparently, and consistently.
6. Ethics Committee Approval
All research involving human participants, medical records, or human tissues must be reviewed and approved by an ethics committee prior to the commencement of the study. The name of the approving ethics committee, along with the approval number and date, must be stated in the Ethics Committee Approval section of the manuscript at the time of submission. The journal may also request a copy of the ethics committee approval as part of the submission process. This requirement ensures that the research has been appropriately reviewed and approved and that it meets the ethical standards necessary for publication.
If a study is exempt from ethics committee approval, the authors must clearly state the reason for the exemption in the Ethics Committee Statement section. If the journal determines that the absence of ethics committee approval constitutes a significant concern, the manuscript may be rejected following editorial review. This policy ensures that the journal maintains high ethical standards and publishes only research that has been properly reviewed and approved by an ethics committee.
7. Impartiality Policy
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts solely on the basis of their academic merit—such as significance, originality, validity, and clarity—and their relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation. The Editor has full authority over all editorial content and the timing of its publication.
Editors and members of the editorial board must not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the explicit written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained during the editorial process are kept confidential and must not be used for personal advantage.
8. Conflict of Interest Statement
Authors are required to disclose any relationships or interests that could potentially result in undue influence or bias in their work. Such disclosures should be made at the time of submission, preferably through the online submission system.
9. Funding Statement
The journal requires authors to declare any financial support received for conducting their research. This information must be provided in the **Funding Statement** section at the time of submission. The funding statement should include the names of funding agencies, grant numbers, and a description of the role of each funder in the research. If the funding body had no role in the research, this should also be explicitly stated. This information is essential for enabling readers to assess potential biases or conflicts of interest.
10. Similarity Rate (Plagiarism Report)
At the submission stage, authors must upload a similarity report (e.g., iThenticate, Turnitin, İntihal.net) together with their manuscript. Submissions without a similarity report will not be considered for evaluation. Manuscripts found to contain plagiarism or a high degree of similarity will be rejected. The maximum acceptable similarity rate is 20%.
11. Peer Review Process
Manuscripts submitted to the ARU Art History Studies Journal undergo a double-blind peer review process. In cases where reviewers’ opinions diverge, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer. The processes related to accepted manuscripts, following the reviewer’s recommendation and editorial approval, are conducted in an ethical, transparent, clear, and accountable manner and can be tracked via DergiPark.
Reviewers are required to complete the evaluation form and submit their reports to the journal under strict confidentiality. Reviewers may not publish or disclose any information contained in the manuscripts they review, even partially. If a manuscript is accepted for publication following peer review, authors are obliged to revise their work in accordance with the reviewers’ comments. If authors choose not to implement certain revisions, they must clearly justify their reasons. In such cases, the final decision may be made by the editors or the manuscript may be sent to a new reviewer.
12. Revision Process and Corrections
Reviewers may request either minor or major revisions, using impartial and objective language. Based on the decision letters received from the reviewers, the editor informs the author of the outcome. The decision letter includes the reviewers’ and editors’ recommendations as well as the deadline for submitting the revised and updated version of the manuscript. Authors must upload the revised manuscript within the specified timeframe.
In cases of minor revision, reviewers may reserve the right to re-evaluate the revised manuscript. Even in minor revision cases, authors are strongly advised to carefully review and address all reviewer comments. If the revised version is not submitted within the allotted time, the revision option may be canceled. Authors who believe that additional time is required must request an extension before the original deadline expires.
13. Withdrawal Requests and Rejection of Manuscripts
At the editorial review stage, a manuscript may be rejected or returned for correction if it does not comply with the journal’s general policies or formatting guidelines.
Authors have the right to withdraw their manuscript up until the peer review stage. However, once the manuscript has entered the peer review, decision, or revision stages, a formal withdrawal request must be submitted. A withdrawal request may be accepted following review by the Editorial Board and approval by the Editor-in-Chief. The withdrawal of a manuscript that has entered the publication process may only be carried out upon the author’s request and with the approval of the editor and the editorial board.
The flowchart related to withdrawal requests can be accessed here (flowchart link to be added).
14. The Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Applications in the Manuscript Writing Process
Our journal follows international publication ethics standards and the guidelines established by publication ethics committees regarding the use of artificial intelligence in manuscript preparation. AI applications may be used solely for language editing purposes, and full responsibility for the content remains with the authors. If AI tools are used for language correction, this must be explicitly stated in the manuscript.
Due to ongoing uncertainties regarding the use of artificial intelligence in academic contexts, authors are not encouraged to use AI tools. Editors reserve the right to screen manuscripts using AI detection software when deemed necessary. Authors are therefore advised to exercise caution regarding the use of AI during the manuscript writing process.