Submission

Prior to submission, please carefully read and follow the submission guidelines detailed below. Manuscripts that do not conform to the submission guidelines may be returned without review.

Submit manuscripts electronically (.doc format with including all figures inside) via our online submission system: SUBMIT MANUSCRIPT

Nesrin DİLBAZ,MD, Prof. of Psychiatry
Editor of the Current Addiction Research
Director of USBAUMER, Uskudar University

Department of Psychology(English), Uskudar University



General correspondence may be directed to the Editor's Office

In addition to postal addresses and telephone numbers, please supply electronic mail addresses and fax numbers, if available, for potential use by the editorial and production offices.





Types of Articles

Brief Reports, commentaries, case reports and mini-reviews must not exceed 4000 words in overall length. This limit includes all aspects of the manuscript (title page, abstract, text, references, tables, author notes and footnotes, appendices, figure captions) except figures. Brief Reports also may include a maximum of two figures. For Brief Reports, the length limits are exact and must be strictly followed.

Regular Articles typically should not exceed 6000 words in overall length (excluding figures).

Reviews are published within regular issues of the CAR. Reviews typically should not exceed 10000 words (excluding figures)



Cover Letters

All cover letters must contain the following:

a statement that the material is original — if findings from the dataset have been previously published or are in other submitted articles, please include the following information:
Is the present study a new analysis of previously analyzed data? If yes, please describe differences in analytic approach.
Are some of the data used in the present study being analyzed for the first time? If yes, please identify data (constructs) that were not included in previously published or submitted manuscripts.
Are there published or submitted papers from this data set that address related questions? If yes, please provide the citations, and describe the degree of overlap and the unique contributions of your submitted manuscript.
the full postal and email address of the corresponding author;
the complete telephone and fax numbers of the same;
the proposed category under which the manuscript was submitted;
a statement that the authors complied with APA ethical standards in the treatment of their participants and that the work was approved by the relevant Institutional Review Board(s):
whether or not the manuscript has been or is posted on a web site;
the disclosure of any conflicts of interest with regard to the submitted work;
a request for masked review, if desired, along with a statement ensuring that the manuscript was prepared in accordance with the guidelines above.
Authors should also specify the overall word length of the manuscript (including all aspects of the manuscript, except figures) and indicate the number of tables, figures, and supplemental materials that are included.
Manuscript Preparation

Double-space all copy. Other formatting instructions, as well as instructions on preparing tables, figures, references, metrics, and abstracts, appear in the Manual.

Below are additional instructions regarding the preparation of display tables.

Tables

Use Word's Insert Table function when you create tables. Using spaces or tabs in your table will create problems when the table is typeset and may result in errors.

Abstract and Keywords

All manuscripts must include an english abstract containing a maximum of 250 words typed on a separate page. After the abstract, please supply up to five keywords or brief phrases. For the turkish native speakers CAR also requires aturkish version of the abstract and keywords. However this rule does not appy to non-native speakers and our translation office will include the turkish abstract free of charge.

References

List all references in order by number, not alphabetically. Each reference is listed once only, since the same number is used throughout the paper. References must be numbered consecutively in the order they are first mentioned. Place each reference number in parentheses throughout the text, tables, and legends. If the same reference is used again, re-use the original number.

In-text citations

Cite articles that have been accepted for publication as 'in press', include in the reference list.
The Reference section:

Journal article, up to 6 author(s):
Noyan C, Darcin A, Nurmedov S, Yilmaz O, Dilbaz N. Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Smartphone Addiction Scale-Short Version among university students. Anatolian Journal of Psychiatry. 2015(Suppl.1);16:73.

Journal article, 7 or more authors.
Nurmedov S, Metin B, Ekmen S, Noyan O, Yilmaz O, Darcin A, et al. Thalamic and Cerebellar Gray Matter Volume Reduction in SyntheticCannabinoidsUsers.
Eur Addict Res. 2015;21(6):315-20.

Authored Book:
Buckingham L. Molecular diagnostics: fundamentals, methods and clinical applications. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis; c2012.

Chapter in an Edited Book:
Rothschild AJ. Mood disorders. AM Nicholi Jr (Ed.), Harvard Guide to Psychiatry, third ed., Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1999, p.281-307.

Page on a website:

Alzheimer Society of Canada [Internet]. Toronto: The Society; c2015. Benefits of staying active; 2013 Jan 28 [cited 2015 May 29]. Available from: http://www.alzheimer.ca/en/kfla/Living-with-dementia/Day-to-day-living/Staying-active/Benefits-of-staying-active

Poster presentation/session presented at a meeting or conference:

Chasman J, Kaplan RF. The effects of occupation on preserved cognitive functioning in dementia. Poster session presented at: Excellence in clinical practice. 4th Annual Conference of the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology; 2006 Jun 15-17; Philadelphia, PA.

Figures

Graphics files are welcome if supplied as Tiff, EPS, or PowerPoint files. Multipanel figures (i.e., figures with parts labeled a, b, c, d, etc.) should be assembled into one file.

The minimum line weight for line art is 0.5 point for optimal printing.

Ethical Principles

Authors are required to state in writing that they have complied with the Declaration of Helsinki Research Ethics in the treatment of their sample, human or animal, or to describe the details of treatment.

Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journal CAR is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society of society-owned or sponsored journals.

Uskudar University, as publisher of the journal, takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognise our ethical and other responsibilities.

We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors. Finally, we are working closely with other publishers and industry associations to set standards for best practices on ethical matters, errors and retractions - and are prepared to provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.



Duties of authors

(These guidelines are based on existing COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.)

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.

Authors are required to state in writing that they have complied with the Declaration of Helsinki Research Ethics in the treatment of their sample, human or animal, or to describe the details of treatment.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgement of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate coauthors are included on the paper, and that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and human or animal subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

Fundamental errors in published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.



Duties of editors

(These guidelines are based on existing COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.)

Publication decisions

The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for societyowned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken,such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations.

Non-peer reviewed sections of their journal should be clearly identified.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the Publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.



Duties of reviewers

(These guidelines are based on existing COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.)

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. JNBS shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. Standards of objectivity Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

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 had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s 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 interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.