1.  General Principles

Ege Academic Review (Ege Akademik Bakış) is a peer-reviewed academic journal publishing original scholarly work in the economics, business administration, international relations with the potential to contribute to international academic discourse. All submitted manuscripts are expected to comply with the following principles:

•  The manuscript must be original and must not have been previously published in any form.
•  The manuscript must not be under consideration by another journal simultaneously.
•   The submission must clearly align with the aims and scope of the journal.
• The research must comply with accepted academic and publication ethics standards.
•  Authors bear full responsibility for the scientific accuracy, originality, and ethical integrity of the submitted work.

Before submission, authors are expected to carefully review the following documents:

•  Guide for Authors
•  Publication Ethics and Editorial Policies
•  Journal Aims and Scope
• Guide on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools

Ege Academic Review adheres to the ethical publishing principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Detailed information regarding peer review procedures, revision policies, appeals, post-publication corrections, and retraction procedures is available in the Manuscript Evaluation Process. 

   2. Editorial Scope and Academic Expectations

Ege Academic Review aims to evaluate not only technically compliant manuscripts but also academically rigorous submissions that make meaningful original contributions to the literature and demonstrate relevance to broader scholarly conversations.

Submitted manuscripts are expected to meet the following academic expectations:

• Present a clear and meaningful research question or scholarly problem
• Engage meaningfully with relevant and current literature
• Offer original conceptual, theoretical, empirical, or methodological contribution
• Demonstrate methodological rigor and coherence
• Produce findings and discussions that offer meaningful academic insight
• Move beyond purely descriptive reporting
• Meet international standards of academic English writing

Submissions that merely summarize existing literature without providing analytical, theoretical, conceptual, or methodological contribution may not be considered for peer review.The editorial board reserves the right to decline submissions prior to external review if they do not sufficiently meet the journal’s academic standards and editorial priorities.

 3.Required Submission Documents

The following documents must be uploaded at the time of submission:

• Anonymized main manuscript
• Anonymized abstract
• Title page
• Cover letter
• Similarity report
• Supplementary materials (if applicable)

Submissions with incomplete documentation may be returned to the authors for technical correction before editorial evaluation.

3.1 Title Page

The title page must include:

• Full manuscript title
• Full names, institutional affiliations, ORCID identifiers, email addresses of all authors
• Corresponding author information
• Funding information
• Acknowledgements (if applicable)
• Conflict of interest statement (if applicable)
• Ethical Approval
• Declaration of Generative AI Use
• Copyright Agreement form

The Title Page template is available within the journal system. Authors can download the template during the manuscript submission process, fill it out, and upload it back to the system.The title page is for editorial use only and will not be shared with reviewers.

   3.2 Cover Letter

Authors are required to address the Editor in their cover letter, briefly outlining the manuscript's original theoretical, methodological, or empirical contributions, and its relevance to the aims and scope of Ege Academic Review. The Cover Letter template is available within the journal system. Authors can download the template during the manuscript submission process, fill it out, and upload it back to the system.

3.3. Anonymized Manuscript File

To ensure the integrity of the double-blind peer review process, the main manuscript file must be fully anonymized. As per our blind peer-review policy, author identities must be removed from the submitted text and file metadata. Therefore, deleting the 'Author' and 'Last Saved By' information from the file properties is required. Files containing identifying author information may be returned for technical correction.

The anonymized manuscript must not contain:

• author names
• institutional affiliations
• acknowledgements
• project or funding information
• any identifying statements that may reveal author identity

Self-citations should be handled in a neutral manner without compromising anonymity or academic integrity.

The manuscript should include the following core sections:

• Introduction
• Conclusion
• other relevant scholarly sections appropriate to the manuscript type

The manuscript structure should demonstrate academic coherence, readability, and logical progression. To ensure academic consistency, readability, and standardized evaluation, manuscripts submitted to Ege Academic Review are expected to follow a coherent structural organization. The following structure is generally recommended:

• Title
• Abstract
• Keywords
• JEL Codes (if applicable)
• Main Body
• References
• Appendices (if applicable)

 3.3.1 Formatting Requirements

To ensure consistency throughout the editorial review and publication process, manuscripts must comply with the following formatting requirements.

Font and Typeface: The main manuscript text must be prepared using Times New Roman font.The main text font size must be 12 pt.

 Page Layout: Manuscripts must be prepared in A4 page format (210 × 297 mm).Page margins must be set as follows:

• Top: 2.5 cm
• Bottom: 2.5 cm
• Left: 2.5 cm
• Right: 2.5 cm

Text must be fully justified. Automatic hyphenation must not be used.

 Paragraph Formatting: Paragraphs must comply with the following formatting specifications:

• First-line indent: 0.5 cm
• Left spacing: 6 pt
• Right spacing: 6 pt
• Line spacing: 1.5

Formatting should remain consistent throughout the manuscript.

Word Limit: Submitted manuscripts must not exceed 10,000 words, including notes and references.Submissions exceeding this limit may be returned for technical revision prior to editorial evaluation.

 Headings: Main section headings must be centered and bold. Heading styles should be used consistently throughout the manuscript.

  Abstract and Keywords: All manuscripts must include an English abstract.Abstracts must comply with the following requirements:

• 150–250 words
• Single paragraph
• No citations
• Minimal use of abbreviations
• Concise summary of purpose, methodology, key findings, and contribution

Keywords:

• minimum 4, maximum 8
• should accurately represent manuscript content

JEL Codes:Appropriate JEL classification codes are recommended for submissions in economics, business, finance, and related disciplines.

  3.3.2 Tables, Figures, Footnotes, and Appendices

Tables

• Tables should be placed appropriately within the manuscript.
• All tables must be numbered.
• Each table must include a clear descriptive title.
• Sources should be indicated where relevant.

Figures

• Figures must be high resolution.
• All figures must be numbered.
• Figure titles should be descriptive.
• Charts and visual materials must be clearly legible.

Footnotes

Footnotes should be used only where necessary for clarification.Excessive footnote use should be avoided.

Appendices

Survey instruments, technical details, supplementary analyses, or supporting materials may be included as appendices.

 3.3.3 Reference Style

Ege Academic Review uses APA 7 (American Psychological Association, 7th Edition) referencing style. Authors are expected to ensure compliance with APA 7 standards for in-text citations, reference list formatting, table/figure source attribution Incomplete, inconsistent, or non-standard referencing may result in technical revision requests.

4. Similarity Policy

All submissions is subject to similarity screening.

As a general guideline:

• total similarity should not exceed 20%
• similarity from a single source should not exceed 2%

The journal reserves the right to reject manuscripts with problematic similarities, even if the overall similarity score is low. 

5. Declaration Requirements

Author Contributions

Authors must clearly specify their contributions using the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) framework.Task-based contribution statements are expected rather than vague general descriptions.

Conflict of Interest Statement

Authors must disclose any financial, personal, professional, or institutional conflicts of interest that may have influenced the work.If no conflicts exist, this must be explicitly stated.

 Ethical Approval

For research involving human participants, personal data, experimental procedures, or other ethically regulated activities, ethical approval details must be provided. These should include institution name, approval date, approval/reference number.If ethical approval is not required, this should be clearly justified.

Funding Disclosure

All grants, funding sources, project support, scholarships, or institutional financial support must be disclosed.If no funding was received, this must be stated.

 Data Availability Statement

Authors must clearly indicate the availability status of the data used in the study.

Data may be:

• publicly available in a repository
• available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request
• unavailable due to ethical/privacy/institutional restrictions
• not applicable

Declaration of Generative AI Use

Any use of generative AI tools must be explicitly disclosed.The declaration should specify tool name, purpose of use, scope of use. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, ethical integrity, and final content of the manuscript. If no AI tools were used, this should also be stated. For detailed information regarding the journal's statement and policy on artificial intelligence, please refer to the 'Guide on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools'  on the journal's website.

 6. Revision Submissions

For revised submissions, authors must upload (1)clean revised manuscript, (2)tracked changes version (author-identifying information must be removed to preserve anonymity), (3)  response to reviewers/editors document. Incomplete revision packages may delay evaluation. Where deemed necessary, the editor may initiate second or third-round peer review.In addition to reviewer comments, the editor or editorial board may request further revisions based on editorial assessment.

6.1. Response to Reviewers

Responses to reviewer and editor comments must be systematic and academically reasoned. 

The response document should:

• address each comment separately
• explain revisions made
• indicate relevant page locations
• justify cases where no revision was made

Response to Reviewers Template:

 7. Language Quality Policy

Ege Academic Review is an exclusive English-language academic journal, making the quality of academic English a fundamental evaluation criterion. Manuscripts that suffer from serious grammatical issues, inadequate writing quality, poor readability, or that fail to align with international scholarly writing standards are subject to technical or editorial return. Ultimately, ensuring the linguistic accuracy and professional editing of the manuscript remains the strict responsibility of the authors.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Ege Academic Review (EAR) is committed to applying the highest standards of publication ethics and preserving the integrity of the scientific record. Our journal strictly adopts the "Core Practices" and ethical principles developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All parties involved in the publishing process (authors, reviewers, and editors) are expected to adhere to these international standards of ethical behavior. Ege Academic Review utilizes the comprehensive guidelines, flowcharts, and case database provided by COPE in resolving complex ethical issues.

Duties and Responsibilities of the Journal Editors, Editorial Board, and Secretariat

• The Editorial Board is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. Decisions are based on the manuscript's importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal's scope.
• The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the editorial content and timing of publication. Based on the reports from the editorial board, editors, and reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief may accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript.
• Following the preliminary review by the editorial board, only manuscripts that meet the journal's basic criteria are forwarded to the relevant editors to undergo a double-blind peer-review process by at least two independent expert reviewers. Editors are responsible for ensuring the technical quality, integrity, and fair conduct of this process.
• The journal editors, editorial board, and secretariat must ensure the confidentiality of all submitted works until publication, except in cases of suspected simultaneous submission. Rejected works or unpublished materials and ideas cannot be used in the editors' or reviewers' own research without the explicit written consent of the authors.
• All editors and the editorial board evaluate manuscripts solely on their intellectual content without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, age, or political philosophy.
• Editors must recuse themselves from the evaluation process of a manuscript in the event of a conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors or institutions. All participants are required to declare relevant conflicts of interest. (For details, see the Conflict of Interest Policy).
• The Editorial Board takes necessary measures when ethical complaints such as non-compliance with submission guidelines, defamation, copyright infringement, or plagiarism are raised. In the event of suspected misconduct, editors follow COPE flowcharts to protect the integrity of the academic record and, if necessary, contact the authors' affiliated institutions.
• The Editorial Board manages appeals against editorial decisions and complaints regarding research/publication misconduct. A transparent and objective procedure is followed to re-evaluate such cases when necessary.

Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Ege Academic Review implements a double-blind peer-review process where the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential. Reviewers must respect this confidentiality; they must not attempt to identify the authors nor disclose their own identities to the authors at any stage of the review.
• Reviewers are obligated to treat the information regarding the manuscripts submitted by authors as privileged information and keep it confidential.
• When evaluating submitted works, reviewers and editors must limit themselves solely to the intellectual and scientific content.
• Reviewers are obligated to promptly notify the relevant editor of any misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, other unethical activities) by the author(s).
• If reviewers realize they are in any competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with the authors of the manuscript, they must immediately inform the editor and withdraw from the evaluation process.
• Reviewers must complete the review of manuscripts they have accepted within the specified timeframe. For reviews that cannot be completed within this period, an extension must be requested from the relevant editor.
• Reviewers must not upload manuscript files, images, or data to generative AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT) or any public databases.
• When authors submit revised versions of their manuscripts, reviewers may be asked to confirm whether the corrections are satisfactory. If the requested changes are "minor," the revisions may be evaluated by the editor. However, for "major" revisions, the manuscript is generally returned to the original reviewers to ensure all concerns have been adequately addressed. Reviewers are expected to provide clear feedback on the adequacy of the changes made.

 Duties and Responsibilities of Authors

• All manuscripts submitted to Ege Academic Review must be entirely original, and the sources and materials used must be cited in accordance with academic guidelines. All manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection software (e.g., iThenticate). Works that do not comply with these rules will be rejected directly due to plagiarism.
• Manuscripts submitted to Ege Academic Review must not have been previously published in another journal and must not be under consideration for publication elsewhere while being evaluated by Ege Academic Review.
• Authors must not submit the same manuscript or a manuscript containing the same research to more than one journal concurrently.
• Authors cannot submit works that have been published elsewhere or those for which a retraction process has not been properly completed (official notification and index update). The ethical responsibility arising from incomplete declarations lies with the author.
• Works that have been presented at conferences and whose abstracts have been published may be accepted for evaluation, provided that the date and venue of the presentation and publication are stated to the editor.
• Authors should be prepared to provide the raw data of their research for editorial review and agree to make the data public where applicable. To ensure reproducibility and transparency, authors must retain this data for at least five years from the date of publication.
• Ege Academic Review adopts the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) model to ensure transparency in author contributions. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the study. The role of each author (e.g., Conceptualization, Methodology, Data Curation, Analysis, Writing – Original Draft) must be clearly defined in the title page during submission. Authors should declare their specific roles, not their contribution percentages.
• Ege Academic Review supports the responsible, ethical, and transparent use of generative artificial intelligence technologies. However, to maintain scientific integrity, the following principles and restrictions apply:
  • General Principles: Generative AI tools may only be used as supportive tools. Authors are solely responsible for the originality, accuracy, and scientific validity of the content. AI tools cannot be listed as authors.
  • Declaration Requirement: Authors must explicitly state the name, version, purpose, and scope of the tool used. This disclosure should be included in the "Methods" or "Acknowledgements" section. Authors are obligated to verify all text, images, tables, or data generated by AI.
  • Restrictions and Prohibitions: The use of generative AI for the purpose of fabricating or manipulating data is strictly prohibited. Using AI outputs without proper citation is considered plagiarism.
  • Ultimate Responsibility: AI tools cannot assume research responsibility. Authors remain solely responsible for compliance with ethical, scientific, and copyright standards. Ege Academic Review reserves the right to take editorial action in the event of a violation of these principles.
• All authors must declare any financial or personal relationships that might be construed to influence their research. All sources of financial support received for the project (funds, grants, institutional support, etc.) must be explicitly stated at the end of the text.
• Within the scope of the TR Dizin Journal Evaluation Criteria (https://trdizin.gov.tr/kriterler/), studies that require ethics committee approval cannot be published without such approval. Authors must obtain "Ethics Committee Approval" and provide proof. Approval details (institution, date, and document number) must be stated within the manuscript.
• For studies falling outside this scope, a document stating that the relevant study does not require ethics committee approval, signed by all authors, must be scanned and uploaded to the system. Otherwise, the manuscripts will not be evaluated.
• Upon submission of a manuscript for review, the editorial board assumes that the authors have accepted the conditions stated above.
• Authors who wish to withdraw their submitted works due to delay or any other reason must contact the editor.
• Authors will not be paid any royalties in exchange for the publication of their works.

    Post-Publication Processes

• If a significant error that does not invalidate the research findings is identified in a published article, Ege Academic Review issues a formal "Correction" notice. This notice details the changes made and is linked to the original article to ensure the integrity of the scientific record.
• A "Retraction" procedure is applied to articles containing proven misconduct (plagiarism, data fabrication), unethical research, or fundamental errors that invalidate the results of the study. In accordance with COPE Retraction Guidelines, a clear retraction notice is published.
• In complex situations where an investigation into potential misconduct is ongoing but not yet concluded, the Editorial Board may issue an "Expression of Concern" to inform readers about possible issues regarding the integrity of the article.

• Ege Academic Review ensures the permanent archiving of all versions of the published records (including corrections and retractions). The journal maintains its commitment to protecting the intellectual property of the authors while safeguarding the public's right to access accurate scientific information.

  Conflict of Interest Policy

Ege Academic Review requires all participants involved in the peer-review and publication process (authors, reviewers, and editors) to declare potential conflicts of interest that could bias their work.

• A conflict of interest occurs when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as the validity of the research) is influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain or personal relationships).
• Authors must declare all financial and personal relationships that could influence their research. This includes funding, grants, or institutional affiliations.
• Reviewers must decline to review in the event of a conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors or institutions.

• Editors must cease managing the editorial process and recuse themselves if they experience a conflict of interest with the authors or the content of the manuscript.

  Declarations

Authors are required to clearly state the following declarations during the manuscript submission process to EAR:

1. Author Contributions (CRediT): Ege Academic Review adopts the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) model to ensure transparency in author contributions. The specific role of each author in the study (e.g., Conceptualization, Methodology, Data Collection, Analysis, Writing – Original Draft) must be clearly defined at the end of the manuscript. Instead of general statements like "contributed," concrete distribution of tasks must be specified.
2. Conflict of Interest Statement: Authors must declare any financial, personal, or institutional relationship that could influence the research or cast doubt on its objectivity. If there is no conflict of interest, the statement "The authors declare no conflict of interest" must be added.
3. Ethical Approval and Permissions: In accordance with TR Dizin and international standards, it is mandatory to obtain "Ethics Committee Approval" for all studies requiring it. The name of the committee, approval date, and document number must be specified in this section. If the study does not require ethics committee approval, this must be declared along with the justification, and the relevant form signed by all authors must be uploaded to the system.
4. Funding Disclosure: All sources of funding that supported the conduct of the research or preparation for publication (e.g., TÜBİTAK, BAP, EU Funds, or private corporate support) must be specified under this heading.
5. Statement on AI Use: If generative artificial intelligence tools were used during the manuscript preparation process, the name, version, and scope of use of the tool must be detailed here.
6. 6. Data Availability Statement: Authors are required to explicitly declare the availability status of the data utilized in the research.

Procedures to be Followed in Case of Ethical Violations

Unethical behaviors (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, authorship disputes, or conflicts of interest) may be brought to the attention of the editor or publisher at any time, by anyone. The person informing the editor must provide sufficient information and evidence for an investigation to be initiated.

Ege Academic Review takes all allegations of unethical publication behavior seriously. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for initiating a formal investigation in line with COPE Flowcharts. The principle of confidentiality is maintained during this process, and the parties accused are given the opportunity to respond to the allegations.

Depending on the severity of the misconduct, the Editorial Board may take the following measures:

• Informing the author or reviewer in cases where standards were misunderstood or misapplied.
• Formal rejection of the manuscript.
• Sending an official letter to the author's institution or the relevant funding body.
• Publishing a formal notice (Correction or Retraction) detailing the misconduct.
• Imposing a temporary or permanent ban on future manuscript submissions by the individuals involved.