All parties involved in the publishing process (Editors, Reviewers, Authors and Publishers) are expected to agree on the following ethical principles. Articles submitted first are checked for plagiarism with the Turnitin program. Articles with more than 20% similarity are rejected.

All submissions must be original, unpublished (including as full text in conference proceedings), and not under the review of any other publication synchronously. Authors must ensure that submitted work is original. They must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere or is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere, in any language. Applicable copyright laws and conventions must be followed. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) must be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement. Any work or words of other authors, contributors, or sources must be appropriately credited and referenced.

Each manuscript is reviewed by one of the editors and at least two referees under double-blind peer review process. Plagiarism, duplication, fraud authorship/denied authorship, research/data fabrication, salami slicing/salami publication, breaching of copyrights, prevailing conflict of interest are unnethical behaviors.

All manuscripts not in accordance with the accepted ethical standards will be removed from the publication. This also contains any possible malpractice discovered after the publication. In accordance with the code of conduct we will report any cases of suspected plagiarism or duplicate publishing.

GSI Journals Serie A: Advancements in Tourism Recreation and Sports Sciences adopts the ethical standards set by (The Committee on Publication Ethics - COPE). Publication and scientific ethics are based on the ethical standards of COPE (https://publicationethics.org/).

Research Ethics
The journal adheres to the highest standards in research ethics and follows the principles of international research ethics as defined below. The authors are responsible for the compliance of the manuscripts with the ethical rules.

- Principles of integrity, quality and transparency should be sustained in designing the research, reviewing the design and conducting the research.
- The research team and participants should be fully informed about the aim, methods, possible uses and requirements of the research and risks of participation in research.
- The confidentiality of the information provided by the research participants and the confidentiality of the respondents should be ensured. The research should be designed to protect the autonomy and dignity of the participants.
- Research participants should participate in the research voluntarily, not under any coercion.
- Any possible harm to participants must be avoided. The research should be planned in such a way that the participants are not at risk.
- The independence of research must be clear; and any conflict of interest or must be disclosed.
- In experimental studies with human subjects, written informed consent of the participants who decide to participate in the research must be obtained. In the case of children and those under wardship or with confirmed insanity, legal custodian’s assent must be obtained.
- If the study is to be carried out in any institution or organization, approval must be obtained from this institution or organization.
- In studies with human subject, it must be noted in the method’s section of the manuscript that the informed consent of the participants and ethics committee approval from the institution where the study has been conducted have been obtained.

Data Sharing and Reproducibility Policy
The journal promotes transparency, reproducibility, and responsible data sharing in academic research. For the purposes of editorial evaluation, post-publication verification, and the reproducibility of research findings, authors may be requested to provide raw data, detailed methodological information, or supplementary materials during the review process or after publication. Authors are encouraged to make their research data openly available whenever possible and may be asked to include a Data Availability Statement indicating whether the data are publicly accessible, available upon reasonable request, or subject to ethical, legal, or confidentiality restrictions. In cases where data sharing is limited, authors must clearly and explicitly state the conditions under which the data can be accessed. Data fabrication, data falsification, or selective reporting of data are strictly prohibited and are regarded as serious breaches of publication ethics.

Author's Responsibilities
It is authors’ responsibility to ensure that the article is in accordance with scientific and ethical standards and rules. And authors must ensure that submitted work is original. They must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere or is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere, in any language. Applicable copyright laws and conventions must be followed. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) must be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement. Any work or words of other authors, contributors, or sources must be appropriately credited and referenced.

All the authors of a submitted manuscript must have direct scientific and academic contribution to the manuscript. The author(s) of the original research articles is defined as a person who is significantly involved in “conceptualization and design of the study”, “collecting the data”, “analyzing the data”, “writing the manuscript”, “reviewing the manuscript with a critical perspective” and “planning/conducting the study of the manuscript and/or revising it”. Fund raising, data collection or supervision of the research group are not sufficient roles to be accepted as an author. The author(s) must meet all these criteria described above. The order of names in the author list of an article must be a co-decision and it must be indicated in the Copyright Agreement Form. The individuals who do not meet the authorship criteria but contributed to the study must take place in the acknowledgement section. Individuals providing technical support, assisting writing, providing a general support, providing material or financial support are examples to be indicated in acknowledgement section.

All authors must disclose all issues concerning financial relationship, conflict of interest, and competing interest that may potentially influence the results of the research or scientific judgment.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published paper, it is the author’s obligation to promptly cooperate with the Editor to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.

Editorial Independence and Impartiality
Although the Publisher and the Editor-in-Chief of the journal are the same individual, the editorial processes are conducted within a clearly defined framework designed to ensure independence, impartiality, and the avoidance of conflicts of interest. The primary responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief is to conduct the initial editorial screening of submitted manuscripts, assess their compliance with the journal’s scope and publication policies, and either assign suitable manuscripts to the relevant Section Editors or apply a reasoned editorial desk rejection where appropriate (for example, when a manuscript is clearly out of scope, fails to meet basic methodological or ethical standards, or contravenes the journal’s publication policies).

The Editor-in-Chief does not routinely participate in reviewer selection, peer review management, or the formulation of scientific evaluation decisions. In cases where personal, institutional, or academic conflicts of interest may arise, the Editor-in-Chief is fully excluded from the editorial process of the relevant manuscript. Intervention by the Editor-in-Chief is limited to exceptional circumstances—such as serious discrepancies between reviewer eports, substantiated allegations of ethical misconduct, formal appeals, or procedural disputes—and is conducted in accordance with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). This governance structure is intended to ensure that editorial decisions are made transparently, independently, and free from individual influence.

Responsibilities of Section Editors and Reviewers
Section Editors are responsible for managing the scientific evaluation of manuscripts assigned to them. Their duties include selecting independent and qualified reviewers, overseeing the double-blind peer review process, evaluating reviewer reports, and formulating editorial recommendations based on those reports. Section Editors must ensure that the review process is conducted fairly, confidentially, and without bias.

To prevent conflicts of interest and to uphold ethical standards, the journal’s policy prohibits the assignment of reviewers who are employed by the same institution as any of the manuscript’s authors. Section Editors must exercise due diligence to avoid such assignments when selecting reviewers. Reviewers are required to declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest (including institutional, financial, personal, or professional relationships) prior to accepting a review invitation. If a reviewer realizes after accepting that a relevant conflict exists or if the editorial office becomes aware of an undisclosed conflict (for example, a reviewer is from the same department or institution as an author), the reviewer must recuse themself, inform the editorial office immediately, and any submitted review will be excluded from the decision process; an alternative independent reviewer will be appointed.

Reviewers must conduct their assessments objectively and confidentially, reporting any suspected ethical issues (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate publication) to the editorial office. Reviewers who are not sufficiently qualified to review a manuscript or who cannot meet the requested timeframe should decline the invitation promptly.

Complaints and Appeals Policy
The journal operates a transparent, fair, and systematic mechanism for handling complaints and appeals related to editorial decisions, peer review processes, and publication ethics. Authors may submit reasoned and evidence-based appeals against editorial or reviewer decisions within a reasonable period following notification of the decision by contacting the Editorial Office via the journal’s official communication channels. Appeals are initially reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, where deemed necessary, the opinion of an independent member of the Editorial Board who was not involved in the original decision may be sought. Complaints concerning editorial practices, the integrity of the peer review process, or alleged ethical violations are evaluated in accordance with the principles and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All complaints and appeals are handled with due regard to confidentiality, objectivity, impartiality, and the avoidance of conflicts of interest.

Manuscript Evaluation Process
A manuscript sent by researchers is examined by the journal secretary within 7 days from the date of submission to see if the manuscript, title page, copyright agreement, and service fee receipt are sent correctly and completely. If these requested files are sent properly and completely, the manuscript; in the second stage, it is evaluated whether it complies with the journal's writing rules (article template). If the manuscript does not comply with the writing rules, it is returned to the author. If the manuscript complies with the writing rules, it is evaluated whether it has been sent according to the template. If the manuscript is not adapted and sent according to the template, it is not taken into the evaluation process. During this process, it is expected that the researcher will upload the manuscript to the system in accordance with the conditions set by the journal. If the manuscript is prepared and sent in accordance with the template, in the last stage, the manuscript is examined in terms of the journal's publication principles, writing rules, abstract, abstract, extended abstract, bibliography display, etc. If there is a problem related to these details in the manuscript, the author is asked to complete these issues and send the manuscript back completely within the given time. Finally, the similarity report of the manuscript is taken by the secretary and uploaded. Manuscripts are forwarded to the editor for pre-control and then to be passed to the evaluation stage.

Manuscripts that pass all these stages are subjected to pre-controls by the editor and assistant editors within 7 days (the editor or assistant editors can reject in line with the journal's publication policies) and are sent to the field editor for the evaluation stage according to the subject of the manuscript. The field editors direct the author to make some corrections in the manuscript within 7 days for the purpose of inspecting its scientific adequacy or deem the manuscript sufficient for the referee evaluation process and send it to two suitable referees for their evaluations. The referees' evaluation periods are 15 days after the referee accepts the evaluation request. If a referee does not complete the referee duty within this period, an additional 7 days may be given to the relevant referee to complete the evaluation. If the referee does not fulfill his duty within this period, a new referee is appointed in his place. If reports from at least two referees are positive, the manuscript is taken to the publication stage. During this period, it may be necessary for the manuscript to be re-evaluated by the referees more than once. This process continues until the minor/major corrections given by the referees are marked as accepted by the referees. If one of the referee reports is positive and the other is negative, the field editor and editor decide whether to continue the publication process. In cases where the referee reports are insufficient and far from satisfying, the final decision regarding the manuscript is given by the field editor. A manuscript that has gone through all these stages is directed to the publication editor to be published in the nearest issue or taken into early view after all these inspections. If the manuscript is in Turkish, the publication editor undertakes the responsibility of checking the extended English summary and the English summary. Among the duties of the publication editor are also to control the number of keywords and the number of words in both Turkish and English summaries. After all these checks, the manuscript is directed to be published in the relevant issue or taken into early view for the final adjustments by the layout editor determined by the publication editor. The layout editor completes his duty by arranging the manuscript in terms of the journal's writing rules and styles and making the necessary corrections and arrangements with the responsible author if necessary. Once all the arrangements are completed, the editor obtains the DOI number of the manuscript and directs it to be published in the relevant issue or taken into early view. The author has the right to withdraw his article at any time and in all evaluation processes until the publication date of the relevant issue of the journal. However, this situation must be reported to the journal.

Post-Publication Discussion and Scholarly Dialogue
The journal supports post-publication academic discussion and constructive scholarly dialogue. Readers may submit comments, critiques, or communications regarding published articles by contacting the editorial office. Substantive issues raised after publication may result in editorial responses, corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions, as appropriate, in line with COPE procedures. The journal reserves the right to moderate post-publication discussions to ensure academic relevance, professionalism, and ethical standards.

Warning Regarding Interference with the Evaluation Process and Claims of Nepotism!
All processes (pre-flight, editorial evaluation, peer review, and publication decision) for manuscripts submitted to our journal are conducted in accordance with completely objective, scientific, and ethical principles. Transparency and impartiality are fundamental at every stage of this process.

In this context:
Any request to interfere with the process through personal or institutional acquaintance with journal editors, editorial board members, or referees, whether explicitly or implicitly, will be considered a serious ethical violation.
Requests to expedite the evaluation process for the purpose of preparing a manuscript for associate professorship applications or similar academic processes, along with any attempts to intervene before the deadline, will result in the manuscript being returned to the author immediately, regardless of its status.
Authors, intermediaries, or institutions that claim or imply nepotism will be reported to the relevant authorities, including the Interuniversity Board (ÜAK), along with the reasons for such requests.
All evaluation processes within the journal operate within specified timeframes. Attempting to interfere with the process outside these timeframes, such as by asking leading questions such as "When will the results be finalized?" or "Will it be finished?" before the peer-review process is completed, is considered unethical behavior.
Journal statistics are general information reflecting average timeframes. Misunderstanding the relevant data or attributing it to personal evaluation processes will be considered a form of interference with this process.
We respectfully inform the public that such interventions and unethical requests will absolutely not be tolerated.

Advertising Policy
This journal does not accept advertisements, sponsored content, or commercial promotions. Editorial decisions are not influenced by advertising, financial considerations, or external commercial interests.

Direct Marketing Policy
Any direct marketing or manuscript solicitation activities conducted on behalf of the journal are carried out in an ethical, transparent, and targeted manner. Invitations to submit manuscripts are sent selectively to researchers whose academic expertise aligns with the scope of the journal and are based on publicly available academic information. The journal does not engage in unsolicited mass emailing, spam practices, or misleading promotional communications. All direct communications accurately represent the journal’s aims, scope, indexing status, and editorial processes.

Archiving and Digital Preservation Policy
GSI Journals Serie A: Advancements in Tourism Recreation and Sports Sciences is hosted on the DergiPark journal management platform operated by TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM. In accordance with DergiPark’s national digital archiving policy and the principles of TR DİZİN, all published content is permanently preserved within the ULAKBİM infrastructure. In the event that the journal ceases publication, the full archive of published articles will remain accessible through the DergiPark platform as part of the national scholarly record.

Reference Accuracy and Verification Policy
To uphold academic integrity and ethical publishing, our journal requires that all authors guarantee the accuracy and accessibility of their references. Accordingly:
All authors are responsible for listing all sources in their manuscripts in APA 6th edition format.
References will be verified for accuracy and accessibility using https://referanscheck.com/  . Responsible authors must register on the platform with a free edu-affiliated email address to check their references and correct any deficiencies. This procedure is mandatory to prevent errors prior to typesetting, expedite the publication process, and ensure compliance with academic integrity standards.
Upon completion of typesetting, during the editor’s final review, the manuscript title, abstract, keywords, and reference changes must be updated in the Dergipark interface. This policy clarifies authors’ responsibilities and ensures adherence to ethical publishing standards.