Publication Principles
Dergiabant (e-ISSN: 2148-0494), adheres to national and international standards in research and publication ethics. It complies with the Press Law, the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works and the Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive. Dergiabant has adopted the International Ethical Publishing Principles published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).
Press Law
Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works
Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive
Transparency and Best Practice Principles in Academic Publishing
• Dergiabant checks for plagiarism in studies submitted for review: Pre-checked articles are scanned for plagiarism using iThenticate software. If plagiarism/self-plagiarism is detected, the authors are informed. If necessary, the editors may subject the article to plagiarism control at various stages of the evaluation or production process. High similarity rates can cause an article to be rejected before or even after it is accepted. This rate is expected to be less than 25%.
• The publication process implemented in the Dergiabant form the basis for the development and distribution of information in an impartial and respectful manner. The process implemented in this direction directly reflects in 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 for ethical principles.
• Within the scope of publication ethics of the Dergiabant, all stakeholders are expected to have the following ethical responsibilities:
The ethical duties and responsibilities listed below have been prepared as Open Access by taking into account the guidelines and policies published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (See COPE Directive).
If situations such as manipulating, distorting, and using fabricated data used in the articles are detected, the article will be rejected and this will be reported to the institution where the author of the article works as well. Dergiabant has the right to request output files of the analysis results from the authors according to the feedback given by the editor and/or referees.
If A study prepared for publication is produced from a book chapter, an unpublished conference paper text and a master's or doctoral thesis, this matter must be stated in Turkish and English on the first page of the study.
• In order for the articles produced from the paper to be evaluated, the author must send the article with a wet signed undertaking stating "My work has not been published before and will not be published." Because duplication/republishing/scientific deception/multi-publishing is an ethical violation. According to the TÜBİTAK Publication Ethics Committee, republishing is sending or publishing the same research results to more than one journal for publication. If an article has been previously evaluated and published, other publications are considered republished.
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Correction, Retraction, Expression of Concern
Editor should consider publishing correction if minor errors that do not effect the results, interpretations and conclusions of the published paper are detected. Editor should consider retraction if major errors and/or misconduction that invalidate results and conclusions are detected. Editor should consider issuing an expression of concern if there is evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors; there is evidence that the findings are not reliable, and institutions of the authors do not investigate the case, or the possible investigation seems to be unfair or nonconclusive. The guidelines of COPE and ICJME are taken into consideration regarding correction, retractions or expression of concern.
Plagiarism Action Plan and Journal Precautions
The journal respects intellectual property and aims to protect and promote the original work of its authors. Articles containing plagiarism are against the standards of quality, research, and innovation. Therefore, all authors who submit articles to the journal are expected to comply with ethical standards and avoid plagiarism in any form. If an author is suspected of plagiarism in a submitted or published article, the journal's Ethics Editor reviews the work first. This work is then reviewed by the Editorial Board. The Journal then contacts the author(s) to submit their comments within two weeks. If the journal does not receive any response from the author within the specified time, it requests the investigation of the claim by contacting the university to which the author is affiliated. The journal will take the following serious precautions against published articles that are found to contain plagiarism.
1. The journal will immediately contact the university to which the author(s) are affiliated, in order to take final action against the related author.
2. The journal will remove the PDF copy of the published article from its website and disable all links to the full-text article. The phrase Plagiarized Article will be added to the title of the published article.
3. The journal will disable the author's account and reject all future submissions by the author for a period of 3 years.
Publication of research that involve human subjects (i.e., surveys and interviews)
Dergiabant adopts the "Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers" of the Publication Ethics Committee (COPE) in order to create ethical assurance in scientific periodicals. In this context, the following points should be followed in the manuscripts submitted to the journal:
1) For research conducted in all branches of science that requires ethics committee approval (ethics committee approval should be obtained, this approval should be stated and documented in the article.
2) In research that requires ethics committee permission, information about the permission (name of the committee, date, and number) is in the method section, and also on one of the first/last pages of the article; In case of reports, information about signing the informed consent/consent form should be included in the article.
Editorial oversight and processing concerning special issues
A special issue can be published in the journal once a year upon the request of the Editorial Board. Manuscripts sent for inclusion in a special issue are first subjected to editorial review. Then it is examined in terms of compliance with the writing rules of the journal and similarity is scanned to prevent plagiarism. After these stages, it is taken into the peer review process in which the double-blind model is used.
This journal checks for plagiarism
Submitted manuscripts that pass preliminary control are scanned for plagiarism using iThenticate software. If plagiarism/self-plagiarism will be found authors will be informed. Editors may resubmit the manuscript for similarity check at any peer-review or production stage if required. High similarity scores may lead to rejection of a manuscript before and even after acceptance. The percentage of similarity score taken from each article; the overall similarity score is generally expected to be less than 25%.
Actions against science research and publication ethics are as follows:
Plagiarism: Presenting the ideas, methods, data, practices, writings, figures or works of others as their own work, in whole or in part, without attribution in accordance with scientific rules,
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 them, to present a research that has not been done, as if it has been done,
Distortion: To falsify research records and obtained data, to present methods, devices and materials that are not used in the research as if they were used, not to evaluate data that do not comply with the research hypothesis, to manipulate data and/or results in order to fit the relevant theory or assumptions, in line with the interests of the people and organizations that receive support, falsify or shape research results,
Republishing: To present more than one work containing the same results of a research as separate works in associate professor examination evaluations and academic promotions,
Slicing: Presenting the results of a research as separate works in the evaluations of associate professorship exams and in academic promotions by breaking the integrity of the research into pieces, inappropriately, and by making multiple publications without attribution to each other,
Unfair authorship: Including non-active contributors among authors or not including active contributors among authors, changing the order of authors unjustifiably and inappropriately, removing the names of active contributors from the work at the time of publication or in subsequent editions, using influence without active contribution. include among the authors.
Other types of ethical violations include:
1) Not specifying the people, institutions or organizations that support them and their contributions in the publications made as a result of research carried out with support,
2) Using the thesis or studies that have not yet been presented or defended and accepted as a source without the permission of the owner,
3) Not complying with ethical rules in research on humans and animals, not respecting patient rights in their publications,
4) To act against the provisions of the relevant legislation in human biomedical research and other clinical research,
5) To share the information contained in a work assigned to review with others before it is published without the express permission of the author,
6) To misuse the resources, places, facilities and devices provided or allocated for scientific research,
7) To allege unfounded, unfounded and deliberate ethical violations,
8) To publish the data obtained without obtaining the explicit consent of the participants in surveys and attitude studies conducted within the scope of a scientific study or, if the research will be conducted in an institution, without obtaining the permission of the institution,
9) Harming animal health and ecological balance in research and experiments,
10) Failing to obtain written permissions from the authorized units before starting the studies in research and experiments,
11) To carry out studies in research and experiments contrary to the provisions of the legislation or the international conventions to which Turkey is a party, regarding the relevant research and experiments,
12) Failure to comply with the obligation of researchers and authorities to inform and warn those concerned about possible harmful practices related to scientific research,
13) In scientific studies, not to use the data and information obtained from other individuals and institutions to the extent and in the manner permitted, not to comply with the confidentiality of this information and not to ensure its protection,
14) Making 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 mistake or violation of scientific research and publication ethics they see in the articles published in Dergiabant by sending an e-mail to dergiabant@ibu.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
Dergiabant, its editors and field editors adhere to the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Based on the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the principles of the Publication Ethics Flowcharts developed by COPE in possible cases of abuse or violation of publication ethics, it will provide the following ethical duties and responsibilities:
Impartiality and Freedom of the Publisher: Editors evaluate the submitted article proposals by considering their compatibility with the scope of the journal and the importance and originality of the work. Editors do not consider the race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, nationality or political views of the authors submitting the article proposal. Other institutions other than the editorial board of the journal cannot influence the correction or publication decision. The editors take care that the published issues contribute to the reader, researcher, practitioner and scientific field, and that they are original.
Independence: The relationship between the Editors (Editor and Associate Editors) and the publisher is based on the principle of editorial 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 incomplete and inaccurate research that does not comply with the journal policy, publication rules and level without any influence.
Confidentiality: 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 refereeing system and keeps the referees confidential.
Disclosure and Disagreements: Editors and editorial board members do not use unpublished information in a submitted article for their own research purposes without the express written consent of the authors. Editors should not have a conflict of interest regarding the articles they accept or reject.
Publication Decision: Editors ensure that all articles accepted for publication are subject to peer-review 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 work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, comments by referees and similar legal conditions. Editors have the responsibility and authority to accept or reject articles. Therefore, he has to use his responsibility and authority appropriately 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 processes without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards. Any reported unethical publishing behaviour will be investigated, even if it occurs years after publication. Editors follow COPE Flowcharts should ethical concerns arise. If ethical issues are significant, correction, withdrawal can be applied, or concerns can be published in the journal.
Collaboration with Journal Boards: Editors ensure that all advisory committee members advance processes in accordance with editorial policies and guidelines. They inform the members of the advisory board about the publication policies. They allow the members of the advisory board to evaluate their work independently. They can contribute to new advisory board members and make decisions accordingly. They should submit studies appropriate to the expertise of advisory board members for evaluation. They interact regularly with the advisory board. They organize regular meetings with the editorial board for editorial policies and journal development.
b) Responsibilities of Authors
Reporting standards: The authors of the original research should ensure that the work performed, and the results are presented accurately and then an objective discussion for the importance of the work is provided. The article proposal should contain sufficient details and references.
Data access and retention: Authors are required to retain raw data of their work. When required, they should submit it for editorial review if requested by the journal.
Originality and plagiarism: Authors must submit entirely original works, and if they have used the work or words of others, it must be properly cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable. For this reason, a similarity rate report is requested from all authors who submit articles to the journal.
Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or simultaneous submissions/publications: Authors should not submit a previously published article in another journal for consideration. Submitting an article to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.
Authorship of the article: Only people who fulfil the criteria for authorship should be listed as the author in the content of the article. The authorship criteria are as follows; (i) contributed to the design, implementation, data collection or analysis phases (ii) prepared or made significant intellectual contribution or critically revised the manuscript, or (iii) saw the final version of the manuscript, approved it, and accepted submission for publication. The corresponding author must ensure that all authors (according to the definition above) are included in the list of authors and must declare that they have seen the final version of the article and agree to submit it for publication.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Authors should disclose conflicts of interest at the earliest possible stage (usually by providing a disclosure form at the time of article submission and by including a statement in the article). All sources of financial support for the study must be declared (including the grant/funding number or other license number, if applicable).
Peer-review process: Authors are required to participate in the peer-review process and are responsible for fully cooperating by responding promptly to editors' requests for raw data, disclosures, and evidence of ethical approval and copyright clearances. If a "required revision" decision is made first, authors should review and resubmit their manuscripts by the systematic deadline for reviewers' comments.
Fundamental errors in published works: When authors find significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they are obliged to immediately notify the journal editors or publishers, and to cooperate with the journal editors or publishers to correct a typographical error (erratum) or remove the article from publication. If the editors or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a material error or inaccuracy, they must take the responsibility of the author to promptly correct or retract the article or provide proof of the accuracy of the paper to the journal's editors.
c) Responsibilities of the Referees
Contribution to editorial decisions: They assist editors in editorial decisions and assists authors in improving their articles through editorial communication. It should be pointed out that other articles, works, sources, citations, rules and similar deficiencies related to the article should be completed.
Speed: Any referee who does not feel qualified to review the manuscript proposal or who knows that the manuscript review will not occur in a timely manner should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review, thus ensuring that new referees are appointed.
Confidentiality: All article proposals submitted for review are confidential and should be treated as such. It should not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor. This also applies to referees who decline an invitation to review.
Impartiality standards: Comments on the article proposal should be made impartially and suggestions should be made in a way that the authors can use to improve the article. Personal criticism of the authors is not appropriate.
Acknowledgment of references: Referees should identify relevant published work not cited by the authors. The referee should also notify the editor of any significant similarity of the reviewed article and any other article (published or unpublished).
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.
Blind Refereeing Processes
Editors are obliged to implement the "Blind Refereeing and Evaluation Process" policies included in the journal's publication policies. In this context, the editors ensure that the fair, impartial and timely evaluation process of each work is completed.
Quality assurance
Editors are responsible for publishing every article published in the journal in accordance with journal publication policies and international standards.
Protection of Personal Data
Editors are obliged to ensure the protection of personal data regarding the subjects or images included in the evaluated studies. They are responsible for refusing to work unless the explicit consent of the individuals used in the studies is documented. In addition, editors are responsible for protecting the individual data of the authors, referees and readers.
Precaution against Potential Misconduct and Misconduct
Editors are obliged to take precautions against possible abuse and misconduct. It is among the responsibilities of the editor to share the relevant findings, as well as to conduct a rigorous and objective investigation regarding the identification and evaluation of complaints regarding this situation.
Ensuring Academic Publication Integrity
Editors should ensure that judgments containing errors, inconsistencies or misdirection in studies are promptly corrected.
Protection of Intellectual Property Rights
Editors are obliged to protect the intellectual property rights of all published articles and to defend the rights of the journal and the author(s) in case of possible violations. In addition, the editors are obliged to take the necessary measures so that the contents of all published articles do not violate the intellectual property rights of other publications.
Constructivism and Openness to Discussion
Editors should take into consideration the persuasive criticisms of the works published in the journal and adopt a constructive attitude towards these criticisms. The author(s) of the criticized works should be given the right to reply. One should not ignore or exclude studies with negative results.
Complaints
Editors are obliged to carefully examine the complaints from the authors, the referees or readers and respond in an enlightening and explanatory manner.
Conflicts of Interest
Editors take into account the conflicts of interest between the author(s), referees and other editors, and ensure that the publication process of the studies is completed in an independent and impartial manner. 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 work whose referee process is completed. In addition, when the referee process is completed, the authors are asked to fill in the conflict-of-interest declaration form and upload it to the system.
If the members of our journal boards publish articles in our journal, all their duties in the relevant issue are suspended. Violation of the blind refereeing system is not permitted under any circumstances. Such publications cannot exceed 1/3 of the total number of articles.