Ethical Principles
Publication processes of ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies are based on producing, developing and sharing knowledge objectively within scientific methods. The processes implemented in this direction are directly reflected in the quality of the works of the authors and the institutions that support the authors. Peer-reviewed articles are studies that ensure the application of scientific method and impartiality. In the realization of scientific production, all components of publication process (authors, readers and researchers, publisher, reviewers and editors) should comply with ethical principles. In this context, the publication ethics and open access policy of ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies require that all components of publication process comply with the ethical principles below:
The ethical duties and responsibilities listed below have been prepared as open access, taking into account the guidelines and policies published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (See COPE Flowcharts).
If situations such as manipulating and distorting the data used in the articles and using fabricated data are detected, this situation will be officially reported to the institution where the author of the article works and the article will be rejected. ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies has the right to request the output files related to the analysis results from the authors according to the feedback given by editors and/or reviewers.
When the study prepared for publishing is produced from a book chapter, an unpublished report, and master thesis or doctorate dissertation, it should certainly be stated in Turkish and English on the first page of the study.
Example: This article is extracted from my master thesis/doctorate dissertation entitled “…”, (Master Thesis/Ph.D. Dissertation, ….. University, Ankara/Turkey, 2021).
This paper is the final version of an earlier announcement called “…”, not previously printed, but orally presented at a symposium called “…”, the content of which has now been developed and partially changed.
In order for the articles produced from reports to be evaluated, the author should send his/her articles together with a contract with a wet signature stating that “My study has not been published previously and will not be published”. The reason is that duplication/ republishing/ scientific deception/multicast is a crime. According to the TUBITAK Committee on Publication Ethics, republishing is to publish or send the results of the same research to more than one journal for publishing. If an article has been evaluated or published previously, the publications apart from this are regarded as republishing.
Click here for the Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive. Click here for TUBITAK Committee on Research and Publication Ethics Regulation.
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected knowledge network. This is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and their supporting institutions. Peer-reviewed articles support and shape scientific methods. Therefore, it is important for all parties involved in publishing, authors, journal editors, referees and publishing organizations to agree on the standards of expected ethical behaviour:
General Actions Against Scientific Research and Broadcasting Ethics
a) Plagiarism: To show others’ original ideas, methods, data or works as their own work, partially or completely, without reference to scientific rules,
b) Fraud: To produce data that is not based on research, to edit or change the presented or published work on the basis of untrue data, to report or publish these, to present an unstudied research as if it has been done,
c) Distortion: Falsifying the research records or the data obtained, showing the devices or materials not used in the research as being used, not evaluating the data that is not suitable for the research hypothesis, manipulating the data and/or results in order to fit the relevant theory or assumptions, falsifying or shaping the research results in line with the interests of the people and organizations,
ç) Republishing: Presenting more than one work containing the same results of a research as separate works in academic appointments and academic promotions,
d) Slicing: Dividing the results of a research into pieces in a way that disrupts the integrity of the research and is inappropriate, and publishing in more than one issue, and presenting these publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions,
e) Unfair authorship: Including persons without active contribution among the authors or not including those who have active contribution, changing the author’s order in an unjustified and inappropriate manner, removing the names of those who have active contribution from the work in subsequent editions, having their names included among the authors by using their influence even though they have no active contribution,
Other types of ethical violations are as follows:
a) Not specifying the supporting persons, institutions or organizations and their contributions in the publications made as a result of the research conducted with support,
b) To use the theses or studies that have not yet been submitted or accepted as a source without the permission of the owner,
c) Not complying with ethical rules in research on humans and animals, not respecting patients’ rights in publications,
ç) To violate the provisions of the relevant legislation in human biomedical research and other clinical research,
d) Sharing the information contained in a work that has been assigned to review with others before it is published without the explicit permission of the owner of the work,
e) Misuse of the resources, places, facilities and devices provided or allocated for scientific research,
f) To make unfounded, unwarranted and deliberate allegations of ethical violations,
g) To publish the data obtained without the express consent of the participants in a questionnaire and attitude research conducted within the scope of a scientific study or, if the research will be conducted in an institution, without the permission of the institution,
ğ) To harm animal health and ecological balance in research and experiments,
h) Failing to obtain written permissions from the authorized units in research and experiments before starting the work,
ı) To carry out studies contrary to the provisions of the legislation in research and experiments or the provisions of the international conventions to which Turkey is a party, regarding the relevant research and experiments.
i) Failing to comply with the obligation of researchers and authorities to inform and warn those concerned about possible harmful practices regarding the scientific research,
j) Not using the data and information obtained from other persons and institutions in scientific studies, to the extent and as permitted, not to respect the confidentiality of this information and to ensure its protection,
k) To make false or misleading statements regarding scientific research and publications in academic appointments and promotions (YÖK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive, Article 4).
Responsibilities of Stakeholders
Our readers and stakeholders can report any material error or violation of scientific research and publication ethics they see in the articles published in ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies by sending e-mail to atebe@asbu.edu.tr. We welcome such feedback as it provides an opportunity for us to improve, and we aim to respond promptly and constructively.
a) Editors' Responsibilities
• The editors and field editors of ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies provide the following ethical duties and responsibilities considering Code of Conduct and Best Practice for Journal Editors (COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors), Best Practice Guidelines (COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors) for Journal Editors published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and the Principles of Publication Ethics Flowcharts developed by COPE in possible situations of abuse or breach of publication ethics:
• Impartiality and Publisher’s Freedom. Editors evaluate the submitted article proposals by considering their suitability to the scope of the journal and the importance and originality of their studies. Editors do not take into account the race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, nationality, or political views of the authors submitting the article proposal. Other institutions other than the journal editorial board cannot influence the correction or publication decision. Editors take care that the published issues contribute to the reader, researcher, practitioner, and the scientific field and to be original.
• Independence: The relationship between Editors (Editor and Assistant Editors) and the publisher is based on the principle of the editor’s independence. According to the written agreement between the editors and the publisher, all decisions of the editors are independent of the publisher and the journal owner. Editors should reject, under no influence, incomplete or erroneous research that does not comply with the journal policy, publication rules, and level.
• Privacy. Editors do not share information about a submitted article with anyone other than the responsible author, referees, and editorial board. It ensures that the articles evaluated by at least two referees are evaluated according to the double-blind review system and keeps the referees confidential.
• Disclosure and differences of opinion. Editors and editorial board members may not use unpublished information in an article submitted for their own research purposes without the express written consent of the authors. Editors should not have a conflict of interest regarding articles they accept or reject.
• Printing decision. Editors ensure that all articles accepted for publication are reviewed by at least two referees who are experts in their field. Editors are responsible for deciding which work will be published from the articles submitted to the journal, the validity of the study in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the comments of referees, and such legal requirements. Editors have the responsibility and authority to accept or reject articles. Therefore, it has to use its responsibility and authority in place and on time.
• Ethical concerns. Editors will take action when ethical concerns arise regarding a submitted article or published article. As a matter of fact, they continue their business processes without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards. Any reported unethical publishing behaviour will be reviewed, even if it occurs years after publication. Editors follow COPE Flowcharts in case of ethical concerns. If ethical issues are significant, correction, retraction may be applied or concerns regarding the issue may be published in the journal.
• Collaboration with Journal Boards: Editors ensure that all members of the advisory committee advance the processes in accordance with the editorial policies and guidelines. They inform the advisory board members about publication policies. It enables advisory board members to evaluate their work independently. They can contribute to new advisory board members and decide accordingly. They should send studies appropriate to the expertise of the members of the advisory board for evaluation. It interacts regularly with the advisory board. It holds regular meetings with the editorial board for publication policies and the development of the journal.
b) Authors' Responsibilities
1. Reporting standards: The authors of the original research should ensure that the work done and the results are presented accurately, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The article proposal should contain sufficient details and references.
2. Data access and retention: Authors are required to keep the raw data of their studies. When necessary, they should submit it for editorial review if requested by the journal.
3. Originality and plagiarism: Authors must submit entirely original works and if they have used the work or words of others, this must be appropriately cited. Plagiarism constitutes unethical publishing behaviour in all its forms and is unacceptable. For this reason, a similarity rate report is requested from all authors who submit an article to the journal.
4. Multiple, duplicate, backup or simultaneous submission / publication: Authors should not submit an article previously published in another journal for consideration. Submitting an article to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
5. Authorship of the manuscript: Only those who fulfil the authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the content of the manuscript. These authorship criteria are as follows; (i) contributed to the design, implementation, data collection or analysis phases (ii) prepared the manuscript or made significant intellectual contribution or critically revised it; or (iii) saw the final version of the manuscript, approved it and agreed to be submitted for publication. Corresponding author should ensure that all authors (according to the definition above) are included in the list of authors and declare that they have seen the final version of the article and agree to be submitted for publication.
6. Statement and conflicts of interest: Authors should reveal conflicts of interest at the earliest possible stage (usually by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the article). All sources of financial support for the study must be declared (including the grant / fund number or other reference number, if applicable).
7. Peer review process: Authors are responsible for participating in the peer review process and are obliged to fully cooperate by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, explanations and evidence of ethical approval, and copyright permissions. If a “required revision” decision is made first, the authors should review and re-submit their manuscript until the deadline given to the reviewers' comments in a systematic manner.
8. Fundamental errors in published works: When authors find material errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, they are obliged to inform the journal editors or publishers immediately and to cooperate with the journal editors or publishers to correct a typo in the article (erratum) or remove the article from publication. If editors or publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a material error or inaccuracy, the author must take the responsibility of correcting or withdrawing the article immediately or providing the journal's editors with evidence of the paper's accuracy.
c) Responsibilities of Referees
1. Contribution to editorial decisions: Assists editors in their editorial decisions and assists authors in improving their articles through editorial communication. Indicates the completion of other articles, works, sources, citations, rules and similar deficiencies related to the article.
2. Speed: Any referee who does not feel qualified to review the proposal of the article or knows that the article review cannot take place on time should immediately notify the editors and reject the invitation to review, thus ensuring the appointment of a new referee.
3. Confidentiality: All article suggestions submitted for review are confidential documents and should be handled as such. It should not be shown or discussed to others unless authorized by the editor. This also applies to referees who decline the invitation to review.
4. Impartiality standards: Comments on the proposal of the article should be made impartially and recommendations should be made in a way that the authors can use to improve the article. Personal criticism of the authors is not appropriate.
5. Acceptance of references: Referees should describe relevant published works that are not cited by the authors. The referee should also inform the editor of any significant similarities between the manuscript reviewed and any other manuscript (published or unpublished).
6. Conflicts of interest: Conflicts of interest should be reported to the editor. There should be no conflict of interest between the referees and the stakeholders of the article that is the subject of evaluation.
Publication Policy
Article Acceptance
The articles to be sent to ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies should be original articles filling a gap in the related field or analyses evaluating previously published studies and presenting new and significant opinions about this issue.
In order for the articles to be published in the journal, they should not be previously published or accepted for publication elsewhere. Reports presented previously at a scientific meeting may be accepted on condition that this is clearly indicated.
Title of the article should be written in Turkish and English, and the authors’ names, surnames, academic titles, institutions they work in, and ORCID information should be specified. Additionally, the authors’ contact information (e-mail addresses) should be given completely.
The language of the ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies is Turkish. However, not exceeding 1/3 of the journal, manuscripts written in English and Arabic may also be included in each issue. English and Arabic manuscripts should include Turkish titles, Turkish and English abstracts, and Arabic manuscripts are also required to include bibliography written using the Latin Alphabet.
The article should be prepared in accordance with the writing rules of the journal and uploaded to the system. The volume of research articles should be at least 3,000 and at most 10,000 words (excluding abstract, bibliography and appendix). Articles exceeding 10,000 words are included in the referee process if deemed appropriate by the Editorial Board. At the beginning of the article, 350-400 words of Turkish Abstract and English Abstract, 5-8 words of Turkish keywords and English keywords, and Turkish and English titles should be included.
At most one work of the same genre by the same author can be published in any issue. More than one work of the same author can be published, provided that they are of different genres. Article acceptance dates for the journal published in June and December are January 1 – May 15 for the June issue; 1 July - 15 November for the December issue.
Article Evaluation Process
The articles sent to be published are gone through the Pre-Control and Peer-Review Processes.
In the evaluation of the submitted articles, academic objectivity and scientific quality are the most important criteria.
The articles are first examined with respect to compliance with the principles of the journal (Pre-control) by the Editorial Board. Then, articles are passed through the plagiarism control process through iThenticate software. The similarity rate in the plagiarism detection policy for our journal is 20%. The studies that are considered as inadequate in the pre-control process are returned to the author by the Editorial Board before the peer-review process. For the studies that are considered as adequate in the pre-control process, the peer-review process is initiated or these studies are sent to the authors to correct the deficiencies.
A study that cannot pass through this process even though it is examined three times during the pre-control process is returned to the author and does not put into the process again in the same publication period.
Studies that pass the Pre-Control process are evaluated by at least two referees in accordance with the principle of double-blind refereeing. The names of the reviewers are kept confidential. If one of the reviewer reports is positive and the other is negative, the article may be sent to a third reviewer/ referee or the Editorial Board may make a final decision by examining the reviewer reports. The authors consider the criticism and suggestions made by the reviewer and Editorial Board. If there are issues that they do not agree with, they have the right to object together with their reasons.
Citation and Reference System
ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies requires the Isnad Citation Style 2nd edition for writing, citation and reference.
Plagiarism Detection Policy
In detecting plagiarism, it is confirmed with the iThenticate software that articles have not been published before and do not include plagiarism. The similarity rate for our journal in the plagiarism detection policy is 20%.
Publication and Evaluation Fee
ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies does not charge any fee from the authors for the article evaluation and publication process.
Conflict of Interest
ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies ensures that the publishing process is carried out objectively and independently for the authors and reviewers. In studies with more than one author, the contribution rate statement, if any, support and acknowledgment statements, and conflict statements should be included at the end of the review process. (See. Article Writing Template) Also, it is demanded from the authors to fill out the form for declaration of conflict of interest and upload to the system when the process of peer-review is ended.
Open Access Policy
Every single study published in ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies has been licenced by Creative Commons International Licence (CC-BY-NC 4.0). See open access policy.
Copyright
Authors publishing with ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies retain the copyright to their work, licensing it under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license. Authors are deemed to have accepted the text Copyright & Author Rights they sent to ATEBE Journal for Religious Studies.
December 31, 2021
Page
1-18
