General Principles

In the entire process of uploading and publishing the works submitted to Research journal of public finance to the journal system and publishing, especially the editors, assistant editors, editorial board, advisory board and other similar journal management should abide by the principle of confidentiality, transparency and impartiality.

All of the ethical policy guidelines below have been prepared with reference to the guidelines prepared by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The guidelines for detailed guidance and flowchart can be viewed at https://publicationethics.org/guidance/guidelines.

• The names of the referees are not kept in the journal archive regarding the studies accepted or not accepted for publication after the referee evaluation process.
• Information about the study referees is not published in order not to cause a conflict of interest.
• After the evaluation of the studies, a signed thank you letter is sent to the study referees by the editor.

The whole process regarding the studies submitted for publication to Research journal of public finance is kept confidential within the framework of the principle of confidentiality. Information and materials regarding the studies are not shared with any institution or organization, except for the applications made with a wet signed petition by the supervisors of the official institutions. The information requested with the petition is made according to the decision of the majority of votes as a result of the journal's board of directors meeting held in the editorial office.

The responsibilities expected to be followed by all parties, including the authors of the study, referees and readers, especially the editors, are as follows.

• Editors have full authority to reject or accept the work.
• Editors should not have a conflict of interest regarding rejected or accepted work.
• The editorial board should ensure continuity in ethical oversight.
• Guidelines regarding the processes in which the studies will proceed should be published.
• There should not be plagiarism and fraudulent data in the studies.
• Studies should not be included in the evaluation process in more than one journal simultaneously.
• All authors in the study must have equivalent weights of contribution.
• The author should be aware of responsibility in the detection of erroneous data.
• Reviewers should not have a conflict of interest with the study and the author.
• Allegations of abuse should be seriously examined by the editorial board of the journal.
• Studies should be published considering Open Access Policies.

Responsibility for Editors

• Editors should strive to improve the journal and increase its quality.
• Everyone on the editorial board should act by taking into account the allegations of abuse.
• All responsibilities regarding the preliminary evaluation stage, referee evaluation stage and publication process of the studies submitted to Research journal of public finance belong to the journal editor.
• Editors should take care to protect intellectual property rights and maintain ethical oversight on a continuous basis.
• Editors should consider the principle of transparency as a basic criterion regarding the publication process.
• Editors must act in accordance with national and international laws. Editors should take care to keep information that is not appropriate to share within the legal framework.
• Responsibility for the protection of personal data regarding the studies submitted to Research journal of public finance belongs to the editors.
• It is the editor's responsibility to determine the compliance of the studies submitted for publication to Research journal of public finance with the journal's publication policy and ethical principles during the pre-control phase.
• Studies submitted to Research journal of public finance should first be subjected to preliminary evaluation by the editor and field editors.
• Studies that have completed the pre-evaluation process and passed to the peer-review stage cannot be rejected because they do not comply with the journal policy. Responsibility for evaluation within the framework of compliance with journal policy and ethical principles rests with the editor.
• Editors, assistant editors and field editors have the right to notify the author(s) of the necessary preliminary evaluation results and request corrections, in case the studies are rewritten, ambiguous articles or secondary studies are used instead of original studies during the preliminary evaluation phase.
• In case of detection of manipulation regarding the studies, the source of the manipulation should be determined by the editor and the editorial board and reported to the relevant institutions and COPE.
• Editors should ensure that the studies submitted for publication continue to be evaluated on the quality of the works, regardless of any political, ideological, financial or personal interests.
• If plagiarism is detected in the studies submitted to Research journal of public finance for publication, the editors must notify the author(s) of the current situation.
• Editors should do the necessary infrastructure studies regarding possible plagiarism and use the necessary notification and technological resources for any plagiarism problem that arises later on published works.
• If, as a result of the peer-review, the authors withdraw the studies with a justification contrary to the result of the peer-review, the editors should re-examine and review the studies. In case of detection of manipulation, the relevant authors should provide the necessary information to the institutions they are associated with.
• Editors are responsible for conducting the entire peer-review process of the studies confidentially and archiving the referee files.
• Editors should keep up-to-date the efforts to protect the compliance and continuity of the peer-review process with scientific ethical principles.
• Editors should not ensure that the scientific evaluation results made by the referees are shaped within the framework of their own ideas or idealistic thoughts, or they should not guide the referees within the framework of certain decisions
• If the editors come to the conclusion that the peer review process is manipulative, defamatory or far from scientific assessment principles, they may cancel/reject the relevant peer review or suspend the review, depending on the decision of the editorial board meeting.
• The editor has to inform the editor that the most accurate information requested by the authors regarding the studies submitted to Research journal of public finance and the evaluation process has been made and take the necessary steps.
• In the event that the current editor of the journal changes, the decisions taken by the old editors regarding the publication process should not be changed by the new editors, unless there is a clear violation of the existing works.
• Editors should prepare guides for authors and keep the guides updated at regular intervals, if necessary, by changing them.
• Editors should prepare guidelines regarding the refereeing process and the journal management and study referees should be informed about the guidelines.

Responsibilities of the Editorial Board

• The editorial board of the journal should prevent the publication of studies that do not comply with international standards or that contain plagiarism.
• Members of the editorial board should contribute dynamically to the development of journal policies.
• Members of the editorial board should contribute to the development of the journal by providing up-to-date control of international standards.
• The members of the publication box should be aware that they are the most important representatives and supporters of the journal.
• The editorial board of the journal should prevent the publication of studies that do not comply with international standards or that contain plagiarism.
  Responsibility for Authors
• An author should be indicated as a "responsible author" regarding the studies submitted for publication to Research journal of public finance. Correspondence regarding the study is made between the editorial office and the responsible author.
• Authors who want to submit a work to Research journal of public finance are obliged to sign a copyright form and upload it to the system separately.
• Regarding the studies that require an “Ethics Committee Declaration Form”, the form obtained from the relevant institutions should be uploaded to the journal system, at the latest, until the completion of the preliminary evaluation phase.
• Studies Requiring Ethics Committee Declaration Form
  
  • Studies in which survey, focus group, interview, observation, experiment and interview techniques are used, aiming to produce information by collecting data from the participants,
  • Experimental studies using humans and animals,
  • Studies in humans and animals in a clinical setting.
  • Retrospective studies.
• The e-mail addresses of the authors who prepared the studies submitted to Research journal of public finance should be up-to-date and the work should not be uploaded to the journal system by third parties.
• The status of being a ghost, guest, gift author constitutes a violation of the publication ethics of Research journal of public finance. All responsibility at this point belongs to the author(s).
• Authors should not be cited in a way that does not comply with international standards. It is the responsibility of the authors to arrange the citations in accordance with the citation system determined by the journal editorial board.
• Studies submitted for publication to Research journal of public finance should be simultaneously in the process of evaluation in other journals. Responsibility arising from this situation belongs to the authors.
• If the studies submitted to Research journal of public finance have been previously sent to another journal, an appendix stating that they were rejected or withdrawn from other journals should be sent to the editor. All responsibility for duplicating publications belongs to the author(s).
• As a result of the preliminary evaluation made by the Journal Editor and the Field Editor, the study data requested from the authors on suspicious cases regarding the data and the method used in the study by the relevant persons should be forwarded to the requesting journal board members by the authors.
• Corrections requested as a result of the evaluation made by the referees should be made by the study author(s) within the framework of the referee's recommendations.
• Regarding the studies submitted for publication to Research journal of public finance, the information about the authors who contributed to the studies should be entered completely and accurately when the study is first uploaded to the journal system.
• In studies that have been peer-reviewed or published, an author can be added, provided that the written and signed approval of the other authors of the study is delivered to the journal editor within 5 working days following the publication date. If the journal editor is not informed within the specified time, the necessary responsibility belongs to the author(s). However, if the request for adding an author is made after the publication process is completed, the work is republished as a correction in the next issue. In addition, in the process of removing an author from the study, the same steps are followed as in the process of adding an author.
• In case of a change in the original version of the study after the peer-review and in case of a change in bibliography, the authors should convey the necessary information regarding the changed bibliography in the supplementary file to the editor.
• Responsibility for the use of fraudulent data in studies belongs to the author(s).
• Authors should convey the necessary information to the editor regarding the theses they have written before or the theses whose defense process has been completed or whose process has been initiated.

Actions against research and publication ethics:

Plagiarism: It is expressed as plagiarism in some studies as a word group. Plagiarism is an author's thought, opinion, formula, method, writing, figure, etc. It is the expression of the authors' own thoughts in their works by taking them in a way that is not in accordance with the scientific citation rules.

Forgery: Organizing, reporting or presenting the data, presentations or works derived from the authors' work, without being subjected to scientific evaluation, or presenting a research that has not been done before.

Distortion: Modifying data, records or figures compiled without specific research, or falsifying data or findings in the interests of outside assistance received on the subject of study.

Republishing: These are the publications created by the authors by showing that the previous work has never been done and without attribution. Such publications, expressed as duplicate publications, are presentations by the same authors that give the same result and are not related to each other. In some cases, it is republished by one of the authors of the study without the knowledge of the authors of the study. Studies in this situation generally consist of studies prepared to be used in associate professorship applications.

Slicing: Authors make one more publication by dividing a particular work in various stages. In such studies, slicing is done within the framework of arbitrary behavior, far from scientific ethical principles.

Unfair Authorship: It is the inclusion of authors who did not contribute to the study or the absence of contributing authors among the study authors. The right of authorship is not only related to the literary part of the study, but also consists of a process pattern that includes data collection, evaluation, analysis or study design.

• To cite studies in violation of scientific ethical rules or to falsify cited study data.
• The support received from external sources (institutions, organizations or individuals) is not clearly expressed in the study.
• To exhibit behaviors contrary to ethical rules in studies or researches in which experiments are conducted.
• All authors stay away from joint questioning against the criticisms directed at the research.

Responsibilities of the Referees

• Referees should reject the appointment of referees with justification if they do not find themselves competent within the scope of the study subject or if they think that they will have problems at the point of completion within the specified time regarding the study subjects sent for evaluation.
• Referees should conduct the review and evaluation process in a constructive and impartial manner regarding the content of the studies sent to them for evaluation.
• Reviewers should not criticize the authors individually.
• While evaluating the studies, the referees should evaluate the studies with the thought that the most accurate contribution to the development of scientific knowledge should be provided.
• Reviewers should keep the content of the work sent to them for evaluation confidential. The responsibility in this matter belongs to the referees.
• The referees are responsible for expressing their opinions on the citations that they detect as missing in the subjects of the studies.
• In order to increase the scientific quality of the studies, the referees may request the authors to cite other studies by giving reasons. In case additional citations are requested by the referees, the control whether the proportionality and necessity conditions are met belongs to the editor.
• If the referees detect ethical violations, suspected plagiarism, distortion or slicing regarding the studies sent to them for evaluation, they should contact the journal editorial office with justification.
• Referees should specify the parts of the studies that they want corrections in word or pdf and upload them to the journal system to be forwarded to the authors.
  Readers Responsibilities
• Readers' responsibilities arise within the framework of scientific ethical principles and rules.
• If the readers detect a situation that does not comply with scientific ethical principles or international standards during the research they are doing or will do, they should inform the journal editor about the situation.
• If readers detect conflicts of interest in journals, they should report their findings to the journal editor.
• Readers are requested to report any ethical violations they detect regarding studies published in Research journal of public finance to maliyearastirmalari@sakarya.edu.tr.

Readers Responsibilities

• Readers' responsibilities arise within the framework of scientific ethical principles and rules.
  
• If the readers detect a situation that does not comply with scientific ethical principles or international standards during the research they are doing or will do, they should inform the journal editor about the situation.
  
• If readers detect conflicts of interest in journals, they should report their findings to the journal editor.
  
• Readers are requested to report any ethical violations they detect regarding studies published in Research journal of public finance to maliyearastirmalari@sakarya.edu.tr.

Publication Policy

• Research journal of public financecontinues its publication life within the framework of the transparency and publication principles published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which aims to maintain the standards of publication ethics at the highest level. https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing
  
• Studies submitted to Research journal of public finance must be appropriate for the purpose and scope of the journal.
  
• Studies submitted for publication to Research journal of public finance should be critical and in line with the ethics of scientific criticism that produces solutions to current problems in original subjects.
  
• Journal of Fiscal Studies is a scientific, peer-reviewed and free journal that publishes national and international studies.
  
• Research journal of public finance applies the double-blind refereeing system.
  
• If a change is requested regarding the authors of the studies submitted to Research journal of public finance, the signed document with the written permission of all authors should be sent to the editor.
  
• Studies submitted to Research journal of public finance should not be at the stage of evaluation under the management of another journal simultaneously.
  
• Three stages related to the similarity rate of the studies are carried out by the journal management.
• Similarity rate;
  • If it is between 1-20%, it is sent directly to the referee evaluation,
    
  • If it is between 21-29%, a correction request is sent to the author by the editor as a result of the preliminary review,
    
  • If it is 30% or more, the article is rejected directly by the editor.
    
  • In addition, studies with a single similarity rate of 3% are expected to be the highest and studies with a single similarity rate of more than 3% are returned to the author.
    
• Studies that do not comply with the journal's publication policy may be rejected by the editors directly with a justified notification during the preliminary evaluation stage.
  
• After the similarity control, a preliminary evaluation of the studies was made.