Journal of Economic and Social Research follows the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers. The ethical responsibilities of editors, authors and publishers are listed below. For more detailed information, please refer to the documents listed above.

Duties of the Editors

Impartiality and Independence

The editors evaluate the manuscripts based on their academic quality (importance and contribution to the field, originality, appropriateness of findings and methods, and clarity of language) and their suitability for the scope of the journal. Gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, religious belief, political opinion or institution of employment are not taken into account in the evaluation of publications. Also, the evaluation of a publication does not take into account government policies or the policies of any external organization. The editor of the journal has full authority to determine all content of the journal and when it will be published.

The Journal of Economic and Social Research and its editors are obliged to evaluate publications only for their academic quality, i.e. their importance in their field, the originality of the article, the validity of the research and the clarity of the language. The only criterion for evaluating a publication is its relevance to the scope of the journal. The authors' race, gender, religious beliefs, political philosophy and/or institution of employment play absolutely no role in the decision-making process.

Privacy

Editors and editorial staff cannot share any information about a submitted manuscript with anyone other than the author(s), referees, associate editors and the publisher. The decision to interview the aforementioned individuals rests solely with the Editor.

Conflicts of interest

Editors and editorial board members may not use information contained in manuscripts in the publication process (including their own work and work in progress) for their own benefit without the express consent of the author(s).

In cases where there are conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions, the editors will assign another member of the editorial board to conduct the preliminary review and evaluation of the publication(s).

Publication decisions

Editors and the publisher send all manuscripts submitted for publication to at least two referees who are experts in their fields for evaluation. After the completion of the review process, the Chief Referee decides which manuscripts to publish, taking into account the accuracy of the work in question, its importance for researchers and readers, referee reports and legal regulations such as defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may also seek advice from other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Ensuring publication integrity

The Editor, together with the Publisher, guarantees that any reported breach of publication ethics will be investigated, even years after the publication date. Journal editors will follow COPE procedures in such suspected cases. If, after investigation, it is proven that unethical behavior has occurred, they should issue a statement that there is an error, inconsistency or misdirection in the publication.

Duties of Referees

Contribution to editorial decisions

Blind review processes directly affect the quality of academic publications. The review process is carried out with the principle of double blind review. Referees cannot communicate directly with the authors, and the evaluation and referee reports are transmitted through the journal management system. In this process, evaluation forms and referee reports are sent to the author(s) through the editor. Double blind reviewing helps editors to make decisions in dialog with authors. At the same time, writers have the opportunity to improve their work by gaining important insights into their work.

Urgency

A reviewer who receives an invitation to peer review a manuscript should inform the editor as soon as possible if they are able to review the manuscript.

Privacy

The manuscripts sent to the referees for evaluation should be treated as confidential documents. The manuscripts should not be shown to others and their contents should not be discussed. If necessary, with the permission of the Editor-in-Chief, reviewers may seek advice from other colleagues. The Editor-in-Chief may grant this permission only in exceptional circumstances. The confidentiality rule also extends to persons who refuse to act as arbitrators.

Impartiality Principle

Personal criticism of the authors should not be made during the evaluation process. Evaluations should be objective and contribute to the improvement of the work.

Source Citation

Reviewers are obliged to inform the authors of any citations that are not cited in the manuscript. Reviewers should pay particular attention to works not cited in the field or overlapping citations with similar works. Reviewers should inform the editors if they become aware of publications that are similar to any previously published work or information.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers should refuse to review and inform the editors if they have any collaborative relationship with any author, company or institution whose work they are assigned to review.

Reviewers may not use unpublished works or parts of works submitted for review in their own work without the written consent of the author(s). Information and ideas obtained during the review should be kept confidential by the reviewers and should not be used for their own benefit. These rules also apply to persons who refuse to serve as referees.

Authors' Tasks

Reporting

In original research studies, the author(s) should clearly state how the study was conducted and its significance, and present the results in an objective manner. The study should be described in detail to enable other researchers to conduct similar studies and the necessary references should be cited. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, and editorial and other subjective opinions should be clearly stated. Untrue or intentionally misrepresented statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data access and storage

Authors should make the raw data of their research (if data are available for submission) and the editorial version of their manuscript publicly available, if requested. Where necessary, authors should make their data available to other researchers (preferably through an institutional or corporate data repository or a data center) for at least 10 years after the publication date of their study. However, the confidentiality of the participants must be protected and their legal rights regarding their personal information must be taken into account.

Originality and plagiarism

Authors should only publish their original work and properly cite the sources and data used. They should also cite other publications that have been influential in determining the quality of their work. There are different types of plagiarism: presenting another researcher's work as one's own, copying or paraphrasing parts of another researcher's work without attribution, or claiming the results of another study as one's own. Plagiarism in any form is against publishing ethics and is unacceptable.

Each submitted article is scanned for plagiarism using the Turnitin program. This includes references and citations. Any article with a scan result of 15% or more will be rejected without further action and will not be accepted again, even if changes are made. At screening, the article is not imported into the Turnitin database. However, other sources such as Crossref, Ithenticate, Google Scholar and literature searches can be used, especially when Turnitin's database in Turkish is limited. For editors, 15% is not a criterion, they reserve the right to reject and/or request corrections if they see the slightest problem.

Multiple, duplicated or simultaneous submission/publication

Articles containing the same abstract should not be published in more than one journal or in other publications. Therefore, authors should not submit a paper that has already been published in another journal to another journal for review. Submitting an article to more than one journal at the same time is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

It may be possible for some articles (such as clinical guidelines, translations) to be published in several journals if certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the relevant journals must agree that the study can be published in another journal. The data and discussion of the study published in a second journal should be the same as in the previously published journal. The journal of the first publication must be cited.

Definition of Authorship

Authors are deemed to take full responsibility for the publication. For this reason, only those who meet the criteria for authorship should be considered as authors of the study. These criteria can be listed as follows: (I) have made significant contributions to the content, design, data collection process or analysis/interpretation of the study (II) have contributed intellectually to the creation and organization of the content (III) have seen, approved and agreed to the publication of the final version of the study. Individuals who have made significant contributions to the study (such as technical assistance, writing and editing assistance, and support) but do not meet the criteria for authorship should not be listed as authors; these individuals should be included in the “Acknowledgments” section after obtaining their written permission. Obtaining their written permission. The corresponding author guarantees that the author list includes all authors who contributed to the study and that these authors have seen the final version of the manuscript and confirm that it is acceptable for publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Authors should declare at the earliest possible stage (usually by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript) that they have no conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretations of the study. Potential conflicts of interest may be financial, such as grants, educational scholarships and other payments, membership, employment, consultancy, share ownership, expert opinion allowances or patent-licensing agreements, or non-financial, such as personal or professional connections, memberships, information or opinions related to the study. All financial resources (including the grant number or other reference number, if any) relevant to the procurement should be indicated.

Citation to sources

Authors should always appropriately acknowledge the sources used in the study and the sources they refer to when deciding on the nature of the study. Personally obtained information (conversations, correspondence or interviews with third parties) should not be used without written permission from the source. Authors should not use personal documents, such as referees' certificates or grant applications, without written permission from their owners.

Human and animal rights

If the study involves chemical substances or methods and equipment that may cause various harms when used, these substances, methods and equipment should be clearly stated in the article. If the study involves subjects and guinea pigs, the authors must conduct all procedures in the study in accordance with the relevant laws and institutional guidelines and obtain the approval of the relevant committees/organizations. A statement about these should also be included in the manuscript. Authors should also state that in studies on humans, the necessary permissions to work with the subjects have been obtained. Participants' privacy rights should not be violated.

Peer review process

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and to respond promptly to the editors' requests for raw data, disclosures and ethical approval, patient consent and copyright permissions.

If a “revise and resubmit” decision is made by the reviewers, authors should systematically make all the requested corrections and resubmit their manuscript before the deadline.

Basic errors in published works

It is primarily the duty of the author(s) to find a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work. If such a problem arises, the author(s) are obliged to notify the editor(s) or publisher of the journal immediately and to cooperate with the editor/publisher to correct the error (typographical error) or to withdraw the publication. If the editor(s) or publisher learns from a third party that the manuscript contains a significant error or inaccuracy, the authors are obliged to correct or withdraw the manuscript immediately, or to provide proof of the accuracy of the manuscript to the journal editors.

Duties of the Publisher

Ethics violations

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, false publication or plagiarism, the Journal of Economic and Social Research will take the necessary measures to clarify the situation and replace the article in question. This will be done in agreement with the editors of the issue in question.

Measures to be taken include, but are not limited to, pointing out a typographical error, providing an explanation, and in very serious cases, retracting the article. The Journal of Economic and Social Research undertakes to take the necessary measures to prevent the publication of articles containing academic misconduct.