It is mandatory to have approval from the Ethics Committee for studies/articles that require data collection from individuals using scales, surveys, interviews and other data collection tools. Committee approval should be stated on the first page of the article with the board name, date and issue number. Data collection starting and ending dates should be written in the method section of the article. The approval document must be added to “Dergipark” as an additional file. For TR Dizin's opinion on ethics committee approval, see. https://trdizin.gov.tr/en/criteria/

1) All kinds of research conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from the participants by using survey, interview, focus group interview, observation, experiment, interview techniques.

2) The use of humans and animals (including material/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes,

3) Clinical studies on humans,

4) Research on animals,

5) Retrospective studies in accordance with the law on the protection of personal data.

1. Indicating that "informed consent form" was obtained in case reports,

2. Obtaining and specifying permission from the owners for the use of scales, surveys and photographs belonging to others,

3. It must be stated that copyright regulations are complied with for the ideas and artistic works used.

Open Access Policy: BUIIFD; Adopting the principle that providing scientific research to the public free of charge will increase the global sharing of knowledge, it provides instant open access to its content to individual users. No subscription is required to access articles published in BUIIFD, no access fee is required, and there are no restrictions on access and use of articles.

Publication and Evaluation Fee: BUIIFD does not charge any fee to the authors for the article evaluation and publication process. No fee is paid to the authors.

The publication processes applied at BUIIFD form the basis for the development and distribution of information in an impartial and respectful manner. The processes implemented in this direction directly reflect on the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support the authors. Peer-reviewed studies are studies that embody and support the scientific method. At this point, it is important that all stakeholders of the process (authors, readers and researchers, publisher, referees and editors) comply with the standards regarding ethical principles. Within the scope of BUIIFD publicatio ethics, all stakeholders are expected to bear the following ethical responsibilities. The ethical duties and responsibilities listed below have been prepared taking into account the guidelines and policies published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as open access (See COPE Directive in Turkish). See also Theology Field Journals Editors' Workshop Decisions (20/01/2018).

The legal, scientific, intellectual and literary responsibility of the articles published in BUIIFD belongs to their authors. Authors own the copyright of their works published in the journal and their works are published under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.

· The list of references must be complete.

· Plagiarism and fake data should not be included

· The same research should not be attempted to be published in more than one journal, and scientific research and publication ethics should be followed.

a) Plagiarism: Presenting the ideas, methods, data, applications, writings, figures or works of others as one's own work, in whole or in part, without citing their owners in accordance with scientific rules,

b) Forgery: Producing data that is not based on research, editing or changing the presented or published work based on unreal data, reporting or publishing these, presenting a research that has not been done as if it were done,

c) Distortion: Falsifying research records and data obtained, presenting methods, devices and materials that were not used in the research as if they were used, not taking into consideration data that does not comply with the research hypothesis, tampering with data and/or results to fit the relevant theory or assumptions, using the persons and organizations receiving support. falsifying or shaping research results in line with one's interests,

ç) Re-publication: Presenting more than one work containing the same results of a research as separate works in associate professor exam evaluations and academic promotions,

d) Slicing: Presenting the results of a research as separate works in associate professorship exam evaluations and academic promotions by dividing it into parts inappropriately, in a way that disrupts the integrity of the research, and by publishing multiple publications without citing each other,

e) Unfair authorship: Including people who do not have an active contribution among the authors, not including people who have an active contribution among the authors, changing the author order in an unjustified and inappropriate way, removing the names of those who have an active contribution from the work during publication or in subsequent editions, increasing their influence even though they do not have an active contribution. to include his name among the writers by using,

f) Other types of ethical violations: Not clearly stating the supporting persons, institutions or organizations and their contributions to the research in the publications of supported research, not complying with ethical rules in research conducted on humans and animals, not respecting patient rights in their publications, to share with others the information contained in a work that he/she has been assigned to review as a referee before it is published, using the resources, places, facilities and devices provided or allocated for scientific research for purposes other than their intended purpose, making completely unfounded, undue and deliberate accusations of ethical violation (YÖK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive, Article 8).

· All authors must contribute significantly to the research.

· It is required to declare that all data in the article is real and original.

· All authors must ensure retractions and correction of errors.

· Reviews must be unbiased.

· Reviewers must not have a conflict of interest with the research, authors and/or research funders.

· Referees should indicate the relevant published but not cited works.

· Checked articles must be kept confidential.

· Editors have full responsibility and authority to accept or reject an article.

· Editors should not have a conflict of interest regarding the articles they accept or reject.

· Only articles that contribute to the field should be accepted.

· Support the reveal of corrections or retraction when errors are found.

· Must keep the names of referees confidential and prevent plagiarism/fake data.

The referee process is at the center of the success of scientific publishing. It is part of our commitment to protect and improve the peer-review process, and BUIIFD has an obligation to assist the scientific community in all cases related to publishing ethics, especially in the case of questionable, duplicate publications or cases of plagiarism. When a reader notices a significant error or inaccuracy in an article published in BUIIFD or has any complaint regarding editorial content (plagiarism, duplicate articles, etc.), he or she can make a complaint by sending an e-mail to islamiilimlerdergi@bartin.edu.tr. We welcome complaints as they provide an opportunity for us to improve, and we aim to respond quickly and constructively.

Articles submitted for publication in BUIIFD are subject to double-blind peer review by at least two referees. In addition, through a special program used to detect plagiarism, it is confirmed that the articles have not been published before and do not contain plagiarism.

The study is reviewed for compliance with the journal publishing principles, academic writing rules and the ISNAD Citation System. It is scanned for plagiarism using the Ithenticate or Turnitin program. The plagiarism similarity rate is required to be less than 25 %. The preliminary review is completed within 15 days at most.

The work which goes through the Preliminary Examination and Plagiarism Screening phase is examined by the relevant field editor in terms of problematic and academic language-style. This review is completed within a maximum of 15 days.

The study which is reviewed by the field editor is presented to the evaluation of at least two referees who have a doctoral thesis, book or article on the subject. The referee process is carried out confidentially within the framework of double-blind arbitration. The referee is requested to express his/her views and opinions about the study he/she reviewed either in the text or to justify it with an explanation of at least 100 words on the online referee form. The right to object and defend his/her opinions is given to the author if he/she disagrees with the referee's opinions. The field editor ensures mutual communication between the author and the referee while maintaining confidentiality. If both referee reports are positive, the study is submitted to the editorial board with a proposal to consider its publication. If one of the two referees has a negative opinion, the study is sent to a third referee. Studies can be published with the positive decision of at least two referees. Translated articles are sent to language and relevant field experts to be evaluated in terms of conformity to the original, appropriate use of field concepts and language. Translations that experts have a negative opinion about are not published. Book evaluations are decided as a result of the evaluation of the relevant field editors. A maximum of one article by an author can be published in an issue.

Editing Stage: If the referees request corrections in the text they review, the relevant reports are sent to the author and he/she is asked to correct his work. It is requested that the correction be completed within 10 days at most.

Field Editor Control: The field editor checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text. The checking process is completed within 5 days at most.

Referee Control: The referee who requests correction checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text. The checking process is completed within 7 days at most.

Typesetting and Layout Stage: The typeset and layout of the works decided to be published by the editorial board are made ready for publication.

Turkish Language Control: Studies that have passed the referee process are examined by the Turkish Language Editor and, if necessary, corrections are requested from the author. The control process is completed within 15 days at most.

Foreign Language Control: Studies that pass the Turkish language control are examined by the English Language Editor and, if necessary, corrections are requested from the author. The control process is completed within 15 days at most.

Editorial Board Review: Articles that have passed technical, academic and linguistic examinations are reviewed by the Editorial Board and the final publication status is decided. In case of objection from the members, the Board decides by majority vote.