Publication Ethics
The International Journal of Cultural and Social Studies (IntJCSS) requires adherence to the ethical principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for open access throughout all stages of the publication process. Accordingly, the accuracy, transparency, and reliability of the data presented in articles are fundamental. In the event that unethical practices such as data manipulation, use of fabricated data, or deliberate distortion of research findings are detected in the studies, the relevant author(s) or their institution will be notified through official channels, and the article in question will not be accepted for publication. The journal editorial board reserves the right to request raw data or output files related to the analysis results submitted by authors, based on the evaluations of referees or field editors.
The International Journal of Cultural and Social Studies (IntJCSS) commits to acting in accordance with ethical publishing principles and standards and, in this context, to adhering to the highest standards of accuracy, impartiality, and academic integrity at both the national and international levels. For guidance in processes related to publication ethics, the rules established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the principles presented by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) are taken into consideration; the responsibilities of authors, reviewers, and editors are shaped within this framework. UKSAD accepts as fundamental values the protection of the reliability of scientific contributions, the adoption of a zero-tolerance policy towards ethical violations, and the maintenance of a transparent publishing approach in line with open access principles.
Research articles submitted to IntJCSS that require ethical committee approval must have obtained the relevant approval, and the name of the committee, decision date, and number must be clearly stated in the article. Otherwise, the studies will not be considered for evaluation.
Research requiring ethics committee approval includes the following:
• Any research conducted using qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from participants through surveys, interviews, focus group studies, observation, experiments, or interview techniques,
• The use of humans and animals (including material/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes, Clinical research conducted on humans,
• Research conducted on animals,
• Retrospective studies in accordance with the Personal Data Protection Act.
Additionally;
• In case presentations (case analysis), it must be stated that an "Informed Consent Form" has been obtained,
• Obtaining and indicating permission from the owners for the use of scales, surveys, and photographs belonging to others,
• It must be stated that copyright regulations have been complied with for the ideas and works of art used.
Authors' Ethical Responsibilities
• Submissions to the journal must be original; they must not have been previously published elsewhere or be under consideration for publication in another journal.
• Only those who have made a meaningful academic contribution to the work should be included in the list of authors; those who have not contributed should not be granted authorship. All authors must approve the final version.
• Plagiarism, fabrication, duplicate publication using recycled data, and data falsification/manipulation must be strictly avoided.
• The data used in the research should be transparent, verifiable, and subject to review by the editor/review board when necessary.
• If the research has any relationship with any person, institution or financial source that could create a conflict of interest, this situation must be declared openly and transparently.
• In studies requiring ethical committee approval, the relevant permission must have been obtained, and the ethical committee information included in the article must be clearly stated.
• The necessary permissions must have been obtained for any scales, materials, visuals, tables or works used; quotations and citations must be made in accordance with academic rules.
• Authors agree to make revisions in accordance with scientific reasoning, following the guidance of editors and reviewers throughout the publication process.
Ethical Responsibilities of Editors
• Editors evaluate articles solely on the basis of academic criteria such as scientific content, methodological adequacy, and originality; they do not make decisions based on the authors' identity, institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, beliefs, or political views.
• It is the responsibility of editors to ensure that submitted articles are evaluated through a fair, independent, and double-blind peer review process.
• An objective evaluation process is conducted, taking into account criteria such as subject expertise, potential contribution, and ethical suitability in the selection of reviewers.
• Editors monitor and ensure that the evaluation process proceeds in a timely, transparent manner and in accordance with academic standards.
• They are obliged to initiate the necessary investigations and apply the necessary sanctions in the event of situations that violate publication ethics (plagiarism, data manipulation, duplicate publication, etc.).
• Editors keep all information and documents related to the content of articles under review confidential and do not share them with third parties.
• They are responsible for ensuring that similarity/plagiarism checks are carried out effectively.
• Editors undertake the task of developing and updating the journal's policy to ensure the continuity of published works in terms of academic accuracy and scientific contribution.
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
• Reviewers must evaluate the work submitted to them solely on the basis of its academic content, adopting an impartial, objective, and constructive approach.
• If there is any conflict of interest regarding the research, author(s) or supporting institutions, the referee should withdraw from the evaluation process.
• The language used in the evaluation process should be respectful, clear and constructive; derogatory or offensive language should be avoided at all costs.
• The peer review process is based on confidentiality. Therefore, reviewers may not share the content, data, methods, or findings of the article under review with third parties.
• If any suspicious circumstances regarding plagiarism, data duplication, ethical violations, similarity, or copyright issues are detected during the review, the editorial board should be informed.
• A referee who is assigned to a subject in which they do not feel competent should not accept the evaluation process; similarly, if they foresee that they will not be able to complete the evaluation within the specified time, they should inform the editor without delay.
Reporting Non-Compliance with Ethical Principles to the Editor
The International Journal of Cultural and Social Studies (IntJCSS) requires full compliance with ethical principles from all authors, reviewers and editors involved in the publication process. If an unethical situation (e.g. plagiarism, fabrication of data, misuse of the peer review process, concealment of conflicts of interest, etc.) is detected during the evaluation stage, the early view process, or in relation to a published article, this situation must be reported immediately. Reports made through our journal's communication channels (the contact section on the DergiPark page or the editor's email address) are evaluated in accordance with the principle of confidentiality, and when deemed necessary, the process is conducted formally by contacting the relevant author or responsible person/institution.
Such feedback is seen as a contribution to enhancing the academic credibility and publication quality of our journal. Feedback from readers, researchers, or process stakeholders is considered a constructive opportunity for development; a prompt, impartial, and solution-oriented approach is adopted.
Publication Policy
The author cannot request the copyright back from the journal to republish the published work in another book.
During the article submission process, the author's article must be adapted to the sample article template format on our journal's homepage.
The article must not have been previously published in a journal, book, or full-text report.
Copyright information, ethical committee permission required for research articles (including retrospective studies); ethical committee permission information in the materials and methods section, limitations of the study (if any), supporting institution information (if any), scale permission information (if required) must be submitted to our journal as an additional file.
If ethical approval, institutional approval, or consent information is not clearly stated (if required for case reports; ethical committee and institutional approval information may be requested), and if the approval information is not attached as a file in the article file field, the article will not be accepted for the pre-review process.
Ethics committee permission information must be consistent with the article title and author information.
The similarity value of the article submitted by the author is checked by us. As a journal publication principle, the similarity value must be 20% or below during the pre-review. (It would be beneficial for the author to check the similarity value before submitting the article.) If the similarity information is high, the journal will provide the author with a report.
When submitting the article, it is important for the author to write a couple of sentences in the note field to the editor indicating the original value of the article.
If deficiencies are considered to exist in the method, material, data collection, ethics, institutional permission, or statistical stages, the article may be rejected during the evaluation process, and the author will be informed.
It is of great importance that ethical permission, explanations regarding the thesis topic, and information about oral/poster presentations or thesis-based articles are clearly stated on the first page of the article above the author information.
Full-text papers with identical material and methodology are not accepted for publication in the journal. In such cases, the editor may request the author to submit the abstract pages of the paper as an additional file.
In our journal, double-blind peer review is conducted for the selection of reviewers during the peer review process.
Article Evaluation Process
The International Journal of Cultural and Social Studies (IntJCSS) evaluates submitted articles according to the following stages based on scientific quality, ethical compliance, and academic contribution criteria:
1. Preliminary Review Stage (Editorial Evaluation)
• The editorial board reviews the article's compliance with the journal's publication principles, objectives, and scope.
• For studies requiring ethical committee approval, it is verified whether the necessary documents have been submitted.
• A similarity/plagiarism scan is performed, and studies with similarity rates above the specified threshold are not considered for evaluation.
• Studies that successfully pass this stage are directed to the peer review process.
2. Peer Review Process (Double-Blind Peer Review System)
• The article is sent to at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the field using a double-blind review method; the identities of the author and reviewers are kept confidential from each other.
• The referees evaluate the work in terms of originality, scientific method appropriateness, contribution to the literature, and writing quality, and express their opinion in terms of "acceptance", "correction" (minor or major), or "rejection".
• Reviewer reports must contain scientific justification and be prepared with constructive content.
• The editor is authorised to make the final decision based on the reviewers' decisions. Additional reviewer opinions may be requested if deemed necessary.
3. Revision and Amendment Process
• For works that receive a "revision" decision, authors are expected to revise their work taking into account the recommendations of the reviewers and editor.
• The revised article may be sent for re-review if deemed necessary.
• Authors should submit the changes made during the revision process along with a reasoned response file.
4. Final Decision and Acceptance for Publication
• After the referee reports and revision process are completed, the editor/subject editor makes the final decision regarding the work.
• Accepted works are published in order of publication, either as an early view or in the relevant issue.
