Ethical Principles

Actions Contrary to Scientific Research and Publication Ethics
• Plagiarism: Representing the original ideas, methods, data or works of others as one's own work in whole or in part without citation in accordance with scientific rules,
• Forgery: Using non-existent or falsified data in scientific research,
• Distortion: Falsifying research records or data obtained, falsifying devices or materials that were not used in the research, falsifying or shaping the results of the research in line with the interests of the persons and organizations receiving support,
• Republishing: Presenting duplicate publications as separate publications for academic appointments and promotions,
• Slicing: Inappropriately and inappropriately dividing the results of a research into parts in a way that disrupts the integrity of the research and publishing them in more than one issue and presenting these publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions,
• Unfair authorship: Including or excluding people who have not actively contributed, changing the order of authors in an unjustified and inappropriate manner, removing the names of active contributors from the work in subsequent editions, using one's influence to have one's name included among the authors even though one has not actively contributed,

Click here to get information about other types of ethical violations in the Directive on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics of Higher Education Institutions.

Responsibilities of Stakeholders

1-Editors' Ethical Responsibilities
• Make impartial and independent decisions in the publication process.
• Conduct the double blind review process transparently.
• Check the originality and ethical compliance of the submitted studies.
• Take appropriate steps in cases of conflict of interest.
• Take necessary measures in cases of violation of publication ethics (plagiarism, forgery, etc.).
• Ensure the confidentiality of the referee process.
• It should be fair and equidistant to all stakeholders.

2- Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
• Respect confidentiality in the evaluation process.
• Provide impartial, scientific and constructive evaluations.
• Refuse to evaluate studies outside his/her field of expertise.
• Should not participate in the process by informing the editor in case of conflict of interest.
• Should not try to investigate or disclose the identity of the author.
• Use constructive and respectful language in feedback.
• The evaluation should be completed on time.

3- Ethical Responsibilities of Authors
• The submitted work must be original and previously unpublished.
• All authors must have made an academic contribution to the study.
• Must comply with the rules of citation and avoid plagiarism.
• If research/ethics committee approval is required, it must be provided.
• If there is a conflict of interest, it must be declared.
• Ensure transparency in the data obtained during the study.
• Communicate with editors and referees within ethical limits throughout the publication process.

Editorial Confidentiality Obligation
The editors of Dicle Journal of Theology consider all articles sent to them as confidential documents. In this context, it will not be possible to transfer any information about the articles to third parties without the permission of the authors. During the article review process, only the following people have access to the articles: Editors, Referees and Editorial Board Members. However, in case of suspected serious research misconduct, the editor has the right to forward the details to the competent authorities without the authors' permission.

Research Ethics and Alleged Violations
Although there are different definitions of scientific misconduct, Dicle Journal of Theology is based on the principles set out by international publication ethics organizations and deals with problems on a case-by-case basis. Editors take action when they suspect or are confronted with an alleged ethical violation. This responsibility covers both published and unpublished work.
Editors follow up on allegations of scientific misconduct rather than simply rejecting articles. They refer to COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) flowcharts when relevant. Responses are requested from individuals suspected of ethical violations. If the response is deemed insufficient, the relevant institution or employer is contacted and an investigation is requested. The editors make every effort to properly investigate the alleged misconduct and take further steps to resolve the issue.
Dicle Journal of Theology is based on the “Ethics Toolkit for Editorial Work” created by COPE. The editors and editorial board of Dicle Journal of Theology take the necessary measures to prevent plagiarism, citation manipulation, data falsification, data fabrication, and similar research misconduct. Under no circumstances will Dicle Journal of Theology or its editors knowingly allow such ethical violations to occur. In case of any allegation of misconduct regarding the articles published in the journal, COPE guidelines are followed.
When reviewers suspect research or publication misconduct in an article, they notify the editor. The editor initiates the necessary actions in line with the recommendations of COPE.
Dicle Journal of Theology applies the COPE flowcharts when faced with allegations of misconduct on the following or similar issues:
• What to do if a rebroadcast is suspected
• What to do when plagiarism is suspected
• What to do when fabricated data is suspected
• What to do when requesting a change of authorship
• What to do when an undisclosed conflict of interest is suspected
• What to do when unfair or gift authorship is suspected
• What to do when an ethical problem is suspected in a publication
• What to do when suspected ethical violations are reported directly via e-mail, etc.
• What to do when suspected ethical violations are publicized through social media

Grievance Procedure
Dicle Journal of Theology welcomes complaints about content, procedure or policy issues. Complaints are seen as an opportunity to improve the publication processes of the journal and such submissions are responded to in a courteous and constructive manner. Complaints are expected to be submitted directly to the editorial team of Dicle Journal of Theology via e-mail and are treated confidentially.
The editor responds to complaints in a prompt and explanatory manner. If the complaints are not resolved, the following steps are followed:
• If the initial response is deemed inadequate, the complaint is forwarded to a more senior editor.
• If this process also fails to yield results, the complaint is forwarded to the editor-in-chief.
• If the editor-in-chief's evaluation does not lead to a resolution, the complainant may appeal to a higher authority.
The aim is to respond to complaints within two weeks whenever possible. COPE's guidelines are followed and COPE may also be contacted if deemed necessary after the journal's complaint procedures have been completed.

Appeal Process
Serious objections to the evaluations of editors and referees are taken into account. If it is felt that the scientific content of an article has been misunderstood or unfairly rejected, a letter of objection explaining this can be prepared and sent to dicleilahiyatdergisi@dicle.edu.tr. A revised version of the article should not be sent at the beginning of the appeal process. After reviewing the letter of objection, if justified, a revised version of the manuscript may be requested and re-included in the external review process.
It is important that the letter of objection is detailed and descriptive. Only one objection per article will be considered. Therefore, it is recommended to prepare the appeal carefully. Multiple appeals for the same study will not be considered, as prolonged deliberation on rejected manuscripts often does not yield satisfactory results.

Conflict of Interest
A conflict of interest arises when professional judgment about a primary interest may be influenced by a secondary interest, such as financial gain or personal competition. It is important for authors to declare their conflicts of interest so that editors can make the best decisions and readers are aware of this situation in case of publication.
All sources of financial support provided during the conduct of the research and preparation of the manuscript and the role of sponsors in the study should be explained. If there is no source of funding, this should also be indicated. Potential conflicts of interest such as consultancy, salaries and grants should be declared at the earliest possible stage.
In order to maintain an unbiased review environment in the journal, submissions by editors, staff or editorial board members are referred to other journals. If this is not possible, the submitter will temporarily withdraw from the journal and the manuscript will be subjected to a double-blinding process.
Editors are not involved in the decision-making process for manuscripts written by themselves or family members. Such manuscripts are evaluated in accordance with the journal's standard procedures. Editors follow COPE guidelines on disclosure of potential conflicts of interest by authors and reviewers.

Publication Ethics Principles
Publication ethics is an integrity-based self-regulatory mechanism for authors, reviewers and publishers to establish higher standards of editorial processing. Ethical standards are important for maintaining the quality of scientific publications, ensuring public confidence in scientific findings, and protecting the reputation of individuals' ideas.

Peer-reviewed studies are studies that support and realise the scientific method. At this point, it is of great importance that all parties involved in the publication process (authors, readers and researchers, publisher, referees and editors) comply with ethical principles. Dicle Journal of Theology 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 Directive on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics of Higher Education Institutions. Dicle Journal of Theology has adopted the International Ethical Publishing Principles published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA). It also undertakes to comply with the decisions of the Turkish Editors' Workshop.
• Press Law (National Legislation)
• Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works (National Legislation)
• Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive (National Legislation)
• Transparency and Best Practice Principles in Academic Publishing (International Criteria)
• Turkey Editors' Workshop Decisions (National Criteria)

Replay
Republishing is when the same article or substantially similar articles are published in more than one journal. The editors of Dicle Journal of Theology return such articles without review. In such cases, the editor may impose article submission restrictions for a certain period of time on the author attempting to republish. In addition, this may be made public in coordination with the editor of the journal of the previous publication, or all of these measures may be implemented together.

Plagiarism Check Process
It is considered plagiarism to present the ideas, methods, data, practices or works of others as one's own work without citing the source. Dicle Journal of Theology scans all submitted articles with Ithenticate or Turnitin software to prevent plagiarism. The similarity rate of the analyzed studies is expected to be less than 20%. However, the main criterion is the author's compliance with the rules of citation and quotation. Even if the similarity rate seems low, plagiarism may occur if the citation and citation rules are not followed. Therefore, authors are expected to follow the citation and citation rules carefully: www.isnadsistemi.org
Plagiarism, duplication, false authorship/ denied authorship, research/data fabrication, article slicing, slicing and dicing, copyright infringement and concealment of conflict of interest are considered unethical behaviors. Articles that do not comply with accepted ethical standards are removed from publication. This includes non-conformities detected after publication.

Forgery
Falsification means generating data that is not based on research, editing or modifying the submitted or published work based on untrue data, and reporting or publishing such data. Falsifying research records and data obtained, falsifying research records and data obtained, falsifying methods, devices and materials not used in the research, not evaluating data that do not comply with the research hypothesis, manipulating data and/or results in order to fit the relevant theories or assumptions, changing or manipulating the results of the research in line with the interests of the persons and organizations receiving support are considered as fraud.

Protection of Participants' Personal Data
The Tigris Journal of Theology requires that all research involving personal or sensitive data or materials about human participants that are not legally available to the public be subject to formal ethical review.