JOURNAL OF THE FACULTY OF DIVINITY OF ANKARA UNIVERSITY
PUBLICATION ETHICS AND PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE STATEMENT
In what is below, the abbreviation AUIF represents the Faculty of Divinity of Ankara University and AUIFD The Journal of the Faculty of Divinity of Ankara University. AUIFD is an academic journal published by AUIF. The contents of the published articles do not necessarily represent the views of AUIF, AUIFD, and the editorial board of the journal.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PUBLISHER AND THE EDITORIAL BOARD
AUIFD is a semiannually published peer-reviewed academic journal. Submitted manuscripts are first assessed by the editorial board and only those articles that passed this initial process are sent to three reviewers for peer reviewing. If the two out of three reviews are positive a manuscript is considered for publication. However, the editorial board of AUIFD has the final decision to publish a manuscript after reviewing.
AUIFD gives unbiased consideration to all manuscripts, judging each on its own academic merits without regard to the race, religion, nationality, sex, political philosophy, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author.
The editor and the members of the editorial board should not disclose any information about a manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisers.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished material disclosed in a manuscript submitted to AUIFD must not be used in the research of the members of the editorial board without the consent of the author.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF PEER-REVIEWERS
Contribution to Editorial Decision
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and may also help the authors in improving their work. AUIFD sends the revision requests to the authors and expect them to comply with the reviewers’ suggestions. AUIFD may reject an article on the ground that the revisions requested by the reviewers and the editorial board are not undertaken by the authors.
Normally AUIFD gives reviewers 15 days to review an article but this can be extended when and if necessary. Reviewers should only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment in a timely manner and should notify the editorial office of AUIFD immediately if they cannot fulfill this task so alternative reviewers can be assigned.
Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of peer review. They should not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the assessment process to anyone except if authorized by the editör of AUIFD. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the consent of the author.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviewers should be objective and constructive in their review. Decisions should solely depend on academic merit and relevance to the subject and should be expressed by supporting arguments. Any personal attacks against the authors are unacceptable. Reviewers should not reject or approve an article without any necessary explanation.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editors’ attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interes
Priveleged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal adventage. Reviewer should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connection with any of the authors, companies, or institutions.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS
Authors should present an accurate account of the research performed, and offer an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Dishonest, false or incompetent statements constitute unethical beaviour and are unacceptable.
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works. The work and words of others must be appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms including self-palgiarism (text-recycling) is unethical and unacceptable. If AUIFD identifies plagiarism in an article, it is immediately removed from evaluation process. If identified only after publication, AUIFD notifies relevant authorities of the situation.
Multiple, Redundant and Concurrent Publication
The manuscript should offer new, original insights or interpretations that have not been published before and are not under consideration for publication at another journal. Submitting an article already published in any form and submitting the same article to multiple journals are unethical and unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Authors must properly acknowledge the works of others. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of their work.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the article. All those who have made a significant contribution should be listed as co-authors. Others who have contributed in certain aspects should be listed in the acknowledgement section. All co-authors and responsible authorities should have approved the submitted version.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Authors should declare all funding sources and any actual or potential conflicts including any financial, personal or other relationships with other people and organizations.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
Authors are obliged to promptly notify the editor of AUIFD to retract the article or publish an appropriate erratum if they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published works.