Submission Process  

Manuscripts will be typeset using the LATEX typesetting system. You may choose to submit your manuscript as a PDF file for the refereeing process. To submit your manuscript, register and log in to the submission website (https://dergipark.org.tr/en/login). Besides your manuscript in pdf format, you will be required to upload the Copyright Release Form and Orcid numbers of each authors of the paper. This journal publish papers entirely free of charge.

In the review process, papers that do not have appropriate form and have high rate of similarity to other sources detected by the Ithenticate program will be rejected immediately by the editor. In case of acceptance for publication you will be requested to put your manuscript into the HJMS Style and upload the tex file of the paper with the figure and table files if exist. The style folder contains a class file accompanied by a sample tex file:

Style Files: HJMS style_pdf

                           HJMS style_tex

                           HJMS_cls

The authors have to provide a suggestion for Area Editor (in the “note to editor”) and four potential reviewers with their full names and email addresses in the system. The list for the reviewer should be a globally geographically diverse list of potential reviewers. Please note that the suggested reviewers must not be former co-authors, instructors, co-workers, advisors, students, etc. There must not be conflict of interest between the authors and the potential reviewers suggested by the authors. The editorial office may not use these suggestions, but this may help to accelerate the process.

The authors must notice that only two submissions per author per year will be considered. Once a paper is under review or has been accepted for publication, all co-authors need to wait 6 months from the submission date before submitting another paper to HJMS.

The submitting author, who is generally the corresponding author, is responsible for the manuscript during the submission and peer review process. The submitting author must ensure that all eligible co-authors have been included in the author list.

Statistics Section

We publish high quality and well-written original research papers that make theoretical and methodological advances relating all branches of Statistics. Papers on methods developed for real life statistical problems which are anticipated to have a broad scientific impact and demonstrating creative development of statistical techniques are also welcome. Purely theoretical papers should be supported with real life data.

Preparation of Manuscripts

The text of the manuscripts should be preceded by a short descriptive title and an informative abstract of not more than 250 words. If the abstract contains a citation, then the names of the authors, the title, the journal, and the date of the publication should be written in square brackets. At least three keywords or phrases and the 2020 AMS Mathematics Subject Classification numbers should also be included. The main body of the text should be divided into numbered sections with appropriate headings. Items should be numbered in the form Lemma 2.1, Definition 2.2, etc.

Figures and tables should be incorporated into the text.

References should be punctuated according to the following example, listed in alphabetical order according to the (first) author’s surname, numbered consecutively and referred in the text by the same number enclosed in square brackets. Only recognized (AMS) abbreviations of the names of journals should be used. All references should be cited in the text.

Example:

[1] V.I. Arnold, Singularities of Caustics and Wave Fronts, Mathematics and Its Applications, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1990.

[2] B. Banaschewski, Extensions of topological spaces, Canad. Math. Bull. 7 (1), 1-22, 1964.

[3] A. Chirvasitu, Centers of categorified endomorphism rings, arXiv: 2009.09195 [math.CT].

[4] H. Ehrig and H. Herrlich, The construct PRO of projection spaces: its internal structure, in: Categorical Methods in Computer Science, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 393, 286-293, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1989.

[5] C.M. Hurvich and C.L. Tsai, Regression and time series model selection in small samples, Biometrika 76 (2), 297-307, 1989.

[6] T.Y. Lam and P.P. Nielsen, Jacobson's lemma for Drazin inverses, Ring theory and its applications, 185-195, Contemp. Math. 609, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2014.

[7] K. Rökaeus, Grothendieck rings and motivic integration, Ph.D. thesis, Stockholm University, 2009.

Copyright

No manuscript should be submitted which has previously been published, or which has been simultaneously submitted for publication elsewhere. The copyright in a published article rests solely with the Faculty of Science of Hacettepe University, and the paper may not be reproduced in whole or in part by any means whatsoever without prior written permission. Notice The contents of a paper published in this Journal are the sole responsibility of the author(s), and its publication does not imply the concurrence of the editors or the Publisher.

PEER REVIEWING POLICY

Peer reviewing of articles is an essential part of the publishing process for scholarly work and is employed by all reputable scientific journals. It is an objective process that often provides useful feedback to authors and ensures that their works are presented in the best possible way. The editorial board of HJMS would like to take this opportunity of publicly thanking our past, present and future reviewers, for giving us their valuable time and for their vital contribution to the success of this journal.

Initial Screening: Each manuscript is reviewed first by a member of the editorial board, if the manuscript passes the initial evaluation. The corresponding author of the paper rejected at this stage will be informed as soon as the decision received.

Reviewing Process: The editor may seek the advice of up to four reviewers among the experts in the field of specialization of the paper. This journal operates a single blind review process. Reviewers are asked to comment on the originality and scientific correctness of the work, and to note deviations from appropriate ethical guidelines, lack of references to the available literature, etc. A reviewer may recommend acceptance, perhaps following minor corrections; acceptance conditional on the successful completion of a more extensive revision; re-evaluation following a major revision that may involve extensions to the original manuscript; or rejection. The time taken by the reviewing process will vary, depending on such factors as the availability of appropriate reviewers, the number and nature of any requested revisions, etc., but every effort is made to complete this process as quickly as possible.

Confidentiality: The reviewing process is conducted in strict confidence and the identity of a reviewer is not disclosed to the authors at any point.

Final Decision: At the completion of the reviewing process the editor makes the final decision to accept or reject the article. This decision is communicated to the corresponding author, together with the comments and suggestions of the reviewers.  

Policies and Ethics

HJMS is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and to supporting ethical research practices and strictly adheres to the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers. We encourage journal editors to follow the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors and to refer reviewers to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers as appropriate.

Author Responsibilities

• Articles submitted for publication should not be contrary to the ethics of scientific publications (plagiarism, falsification, distortion, republishing, slicing, unfair authorship, not specifying the supporting organization, not following ethical rules in animal studies, etc.).

• The authors should obtain Ethics Committee Permission for required studies such as conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from participants using questionnaires, interviews, focus group work, observation, experimentation, clinical trials on humans or animals. The authors should obtain and specify permission from the owners for the use of scales, surveys and photographs.

• Any changes in authorship prior to or after publication must be agreed upon by all authors, including those being added or removed. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to obtain confirmation from all co-authors and to provide evidence of this to the editorial office with a full explanation about why the change is necessary.

• All authors of a paper should agree on the corresponding author and the order of the co-authors, and check affiliations and contact details before submitting.

• A corresponding author should inform the editor if they want to withdraw their paper from the journal with the consent of the other authors of the paper.

• All authors of a paper should have the ability and responsibility to publicly defend their paper.

• An author should provide the dataset if it is required in review process by the reviewers.

• The authors should declare the competing interest in their cover letters or on the manuscript submission form in the journal’s online peer review system.

• All manuscripts should be well-written in English. Papers below the standard for HJMS will be sent back to the authors for rewriting and can be rejected for this reason alone.

• After acceptance of a paper, the author should follow the writing rules of HJMS and use the HJMS style files.

• An author should not share his/her paper with HJMS logo during the review process in any platforms.

Editor Responsibilities

• The editor of a learned journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal shall be published. Based on the review report, the editor has complete responsibility and authority to accept, reject or request modifications to the manuscript.

• The editor is guided by policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by legal requirements regarding issues such as libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

• The editor shall evaluate manuscripts and should make decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication based only on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s relevance to the remit of the journal. Research papers must be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers. If necessary, the editor should seek further opinions.

• The editor should ensure that each manuscript submitted to HJMS is evaluated for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, or political philosophy of the authors.

• The editor is responsible for ensuring that material submitted to HJMS remains confidential while under review.

• The editor should ensure that peer review is fair, unbiased and undertaken in a timely fashion so that authors do not experience undue delays.

• The editor shall not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his/her own research without the written consent of the author.

• The editor should take responsive measures when the incidence of misconduct have been reported concerning the integrity of a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.

• The editor must not be involved in decisions about papers which he/she has written him/herself or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest.

• Any addition, deletion or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list should be approved by the editor.

Reviewer Responsibilities

• Reviewers should not contact the author(s) of the paper that they accepted to review.

• Reviewers should keep the ideas and findings of the paper received for review confidential. The paper should not be shared with others and also should not be used by the reviewers in their own research works.

• Reviewers should evaluate the papers objectively and professionally. Reviews should be well-written which benefit the authors so that they can use them to improve their works.

• If a selected reviewer thinks that he/she is not qualified on the subjects of the paper, he/she should inform the editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.

• Reviewers should fill in the “Evaluation form for the referees” with the explanatory, detailed arguments supporting their final decisions.

• Reviewers should complete the referee report within the period given by the journal. If a reviewer thinks that he/she will not be able to complete the report on time, then he/she should inform the editor.

• If there is a potential conflict of interest, the reviewer should report this to the editor.

• Reviewers should inform the editor if they think that the paper has some ethical problems like duplication or plagiarism.

In preparation of “Policies and Ethics of HJMS” the below sources have been used.

1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of conduct guidelines and requirements for peer reviewed journals, https://publicationethics.org

2. https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/publishing-ethics 

Copyright: 

The copyright of an article is transferred to HJMS, if and when the article is accepted for publication. A copyright permission is obtained for materials published elsewhere and which require this permission for reproduction.