The Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive of the Council of Higher Education and the International Standards for Editors and Authors of Committee on Publication Ethics should be considered in the scientific studies submitted to the ErLR. In this respect, the Journal assures upon to comply with the above-mentioned national and international rules regarding the “Publication Ethics, Research Ethics and Obtaining Legal/Special Permission”. In accordance with Article 8 of the Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive of the Council of Higher Education, acts against scientific research and publication ethics are as follows:
a) Plagiarism: Presenting the ideas, methods, data, practices, writings, figures or works of others as fully or partly their own work, without giving any references in accordance with scientific rules.
b) Forgery: To produce the data that is not based on any research, to edit or change the presented or published work based on untrue data, to report or publish them, to present an unfinished research as if it has been complete.
c) Distortion: To forge research records and obtained data; to present methods, devices and materials that are not used in the research as if they have been used; to contain the data that are not suitable for the research hypothesis; to manipulate the data and/or results in order to fit the relevant theory or assumptions; to forge or shape research results in their own interests.
ç) Republishing: To indicate more than one work containing the same results of a research as if all of them are separate works in associate professor examination evaluations or in academic promotions.
d) Slicing (Salami-Slicing): Publishing parts of a study in multiple papers instead of providing the full story in a single paper and applying with these multiple papers to the academic promotion by dividing the results of a research in a way that violates the integrity of the research.
e) Unfair authorship: Including people who do not have any contributions in the work; not including those who contribute actively among the authors, inappropriately changing the order of authors without any justification, removing the names of those who contributed actively from the work at the time of publication or in subsequent editions; to include his name among the authors by abusing his/her official influence.
f) Other Types of Ethical Violations: Not giving any references about the supporting institutions, organizations or contributors in the publication of a supported research; not abiding by the ethical rules in research on humans or animals; not respecting the rights of patients in the publications; to share information about the submitted study before it is published as an assigned referee on this submitted study; to misuse the resources, places, facilities and devices provided or reserved for a scientific research; to make intentionally a false, baseless, groundless ethical violation accusation against somebody.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE AUTHORS
1. For academic studies that require the permission of the Ethics Committee, necessary permissions should be obtained from the ethics committees and these should be stated in the content of the study. In the absence of these permissions, the publication is returned to the author at the preliminary examination stage. Studies that require the approval of the Ethics Committee are as follows:
• All kinds of research conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from the participants by using survey, interview, focus group work, observation, experiment, interview techniques,
• The use of humans and animals (including material/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes,
• Clinical studies on humans,
• Research on animals,
• Retrospective studies in accordance with the Personal Data Protection Law.
Moreover;
• Indicating that “Informed Consent Form” was received in case reports,
• Obtaining and specifying permission from the owners for the use of scales, questionnaires, photographs belonging to others,
• Indication of compliance with copyright regulations for the intellectual and artistic works used,
• Specifying whether ethics committee permission and/or legal/special permission is required in articles,
• If it is necessary to obtain permissions, it should be clearly stated from which institution, on which date and with which decision or number the permission was obtained,
2. Submitted works must be the original work of the author(s).
3. All authors mentioned in the study by more than one author have equal responsibility for the submitted and published work.
4. Submitted works must not have been previously published.
5. Any potential conflict of interest should be clearly disclosed.
6. The use of plagiarism and fake data and the use of personal data in the text should be avoided.
7. During peer-reviews, if requested by the referees, raw data on research must be submitted.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF REFEREES
1. Evaluating studies on the basis of the scientific content of the study.
2. Not to consider the author's gender, ethnicity, race, religion, nationality or political values or preferences in the evaluation; evaluating submitted papers fairly and without discrimination.
3. Informing the Editor when the content of the work sent for review is thought to be incompatible with its scientific field or background, or when the review cannot be made within the recommended time.
4. Respect the confidentiality of the evaluation process. Not to share information about the reviewed work or the peer-review process with third parties.
5. To make sure that the style/wording is not hostile, provocative or condescending, and reviewing the submitted work in an objective and constructive manner, away from personalized interpretations.
6. If a conflict of interest is observed during the peer-review process, notifying the Editor without delay.
7. To keep confidential information and/or ideas obtained through peer-review, not to use it for personal advantage.
8. In case of any situation that inhibits from publishing of the reviewed study, informing the Editor without delay. (For detailed information, see: https://publicationethics.org/files/Peer%20review%20guidelines.pdf)

EDITOR'S RESPONSIBILITIES
1. To accept or reject submitted manuscript.
2. Reviewing all papers on the basis of scientific content and fairly; regardless of gender, ethnicity, race, religion, nationality or political values of authors.
3. Not to have a conflict of interest regarding accepted or rejected studies.
4. To accept for publication only original studies that will contribute to the field.
5. To ensure that the submitted works are reviewed by at least two referees according to the double-blind refereeing system and to comply with the confidentiality of the referees.
6. To keep confidential all information about the submitted works that should not be shared.
7. Rejecting incomplete and incorrect works that do not comply with the journal policy and publication rules without any effect (For detailed information, see: https://publicationethics.org/files/2008%20Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf)
Plagiarism and Unethical Behaviors
All studies submitted to the Journal should be scanned with software program such as Turnitin (https://www.turnitin.com/), Ithenticate, İntihalnet etc. before uploading to the dergipark. Studies with a similarity rate above 25% (bibliography, quotes and text with less than 7 words should be excluded) will not be accepted for publication.

Listed below are some unethical behaviors:
• Representing people who do not contribute intellectually to the study as authors.
• Not specifying the people who contributed intellectually to the study as authors.
• Not specifying if the study was produced from the author's master's/doctoral thesis or a project.
• Slicing, publishing more than one study from a single study.
• Disclosure of conflicts of interest regarding submitted works