ETHICAL PRINCIPLES AND PUBLICATION POLICY
The ITU Journal of Food Science and Technology (ITU JFST) is committed to ethical principles, academic integrity, transparency, and impartiality in scientific publishing. In matters of publication ethics, editorial processes, and post-publication procedures, the journal is guided primarily by the internationally recognized principles of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).
1. ETHICS COMMITTEE APPROVAL AND LEGAL PERMISSIONS
All manuscripts submitted to the journal must comply with the principles of scientific ethics. Ethics committee approval must be obtained for all experimental and clinical studies involving humans or animals. This approval must be clearly stated in the manuscript and uploaded to the system during submission.
Studies involving human participants must be conducted in accordance with national and international ethical standards; where applicable, the Declaration of Helsinki, ICMJE recommendations, and relevant institutional/national regulations should be followed.
Ethics committee approval is mandatory for, including but not limited to, the following types of studies:
All research conducted using qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from participants through questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, observations, experiments, or similar techniques
Studies involving the use of humans or animals, including materials and/or data, for experimental or other scientific purposes
Clinical and experimental studies conducted on humans or animals
Retrospective studies (in accordance with the Law on the Protection of Personal Data, separate ethics committee approval must be obtained for such studies, and this approval must be stated and documented in the manuscript)
All studies requiring ethics committee approval, including those in the social sciences
Information regarding ethics committee approval (name of the committee, date, and approval number) must be provided, particularly in the Methods section of the manuscript and, where necessary, in other relevant sections.
For case reports and other studies involving human participants, the manuscript must state that informed consent was obtained from the participants. Participant privacy, confidentiality, and data protection principles must be strictly observed. In addition, COPE's ethical standards for case reports must be followed.
For research involving humans, compliance with national or international guidelines (such as ICMJE) must be stated.
For animal experiments, compliance with relevant institutional, national, or international guidelines must be clearly indicated, and the 3R principles (replacement, reduction, refinement) must be taken into consideration.
Plant and field studies must be conducted in accordance with applicable local and national legislation, and permission details must be stated in the manuscript.
Where deemed necessary, the editorial office may request additional explanations or documentation regarding ethics committee approval, legal permissions, informed consent forms, or other documents demonstrating the research's ethical compliance.
2. AUTHOR RESPONSIBILITIES
The scientific, ethical, and legal responsibility for published articles rests entirely with the authors. The authors guarantee the accuracy of the content and references in their manuscripts. The editors of ITU JFST, the members of the editorial and advisory boards, and the publisher cannot be held responsible for any legal consequences arising from the content of the published work.
By submitting a manuscript, the authors are deemed to declare that the work is original, has not been published previously, is not under simultaneous consideration by another journal, presents data honestly, properly acknowledges all sources used, and that all authors share joint responsibility for the entire content of the manuscript.
Authorship must be limited to individuals who have made a meaningful and direct scientific contribution to the study, and all such contributors must be included in the author list. According to COPE, individuals who have not made such a contribution should not be listed as authors; instead, they should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section. The order of authors and authorship information must be declared accurately and completely at the time of submission.
The full names of the authors, their institutional affiliations, and ORCID iD information must be provided on the title page. The corresponding author’s current e-mail address, telephone number, and any other relevant contact details must be stated completely on the first page.
If scales, questionnaires, photographs, or similar materials belonging to others are used, obtaining the necessary permissions from the relevant rights holders is the responsibility of the authors, and such use must be appropriately indicated in the manuscript.
Authors are responsible for making the revisions requested by the editor.
When deemed necessary, authors are required to provide the raw data related to the study and to retain such data for a reasonable period of time.
If the corresponding author identifies a significant error, omission, or inaccuracy in a published article, they are obliged to notify the editorial office without delay and to cooperate promptly in any correction, retraction, or other necessary editorial procedures. Authors are also expected to provide the data and documents required to support the evaluation process and to contribute to the editorial review when needed. Where applicable, they may be asked to approve the text of the correction notice.
3. PLAGIARISM SCREENING AND SIMILARITY POLICY
All manuscripts submitted to the journal are screened for similarity through iThenticate or comparable plagiarism detection software before being sent for peer review.
As a general principle, the overall similarity rate is expected to be below 20%. However, editorial evaluation is based not only on the percentage value, but also on the nature, source, extent, and distribution of the similarity within the text. A low similarity rate does not necessarily mean that no ethical violation exists, just as a high similarity rate does not automatically constitute definite misconduct. The final decision is made by the editorial office.
The following are considered ethical violations:
Direct copying of text without proper citation
Reuse of previous work without appropriate attribution
Self-plagiarism
Duplicate or redundant publication
Dividing a single study into multiple publications without providing a meaningful scientific contribution
Artificially increasing academic impact through excessive self-citation or unnecessary citations
If such violations are identified during submission, peer review, or after publication, the editorial office will take the necessary actions in accordance with COPE principles. These actions may include requesting revisions, suspending the evaluation process, rejecting the manuscript, publishing a post-publication correction, retracting the article, or notifying the relevant institutions.
4. ETHICAL VIOLATIONS
The journal does not tolerate the ethical violations listed below and will initiate the necessary editorial and ethical procedures in such cases.
Artificially increasing academic impact through excessive self-citation or unnecessary citations
Reusing previous work without proper attribution
Fragmenting a single study into multiple publications without making a meaningful scientific contribution
Fabricating and presenting false data
Altering, concealing, or misrepresenting research results in a misleading manner
Adding unjustified authors or excluding individuals who have made a genuine contribution
Attempting to enhance academic impact through unnecessary or manipulative citations
Failing to obtain the required approvals for studies that require ethics committee approval or official permission
Attempting to influence the peer review or editorial processes through misleading information
EDITOR RESPONSIBILITIES
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts solely on the basis of their scientific merit. Editorial decisions are made according to the following criteria:
Originality of the study
Scientific contribution
Methodological adequacy and validity
Reliability of the findings
Clarity of presentation and academic quality
Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal
Risks of copyright infringement and plagiarism
Editorial decisions are made independently of the authors’ gender, ethnic origin, religious belief, political opinion, nationality, or institutional affiliation.
Editors are responsible for:
Assigning an adequate number of reviewers for the evaluation of each manuscript and not disclosing reviewer identities to the authors
Conducting an objective and timely evaluation process
Selecting reviewers with appropriate expertise for the subject matter of the manuscript
Managing potential conflicts of interest
Maintaining the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts until publication
Examining suspicions of ethical misconduct appropriately
Referring to COPE guidelines when necessary
6. REVIEWER RESPONSIBILITIES
Reviewers are responsible for ensuring that the evaluation process is conducted fairly and appropriately when assessing a manuscript. They must treat all manuscripts under review as confidential documents and may not share them with third parties without the permission of the editor.
Reviewers are expected to:
Conduct their evaluations in an objective, scientific, and constructive manner
Avoid personal criticism
Use professional and respectful language
Inform the editor if they do not have sufficient expertise or if they are unable to complete the review within the given time
Decline the review invitation if they identify any conflict of interest or risk of bias
Notify the editor of any issues related to appropriate citation, substantial similarity, or possible ethical misconduct
Keep all information obtained during the review process confidential and do not use any data from the manuscript in their own work
Reviewers are initially given 15 days to complete their evaluation. If necessary, an extension may be considered by the editorial office.
7. PEER REVIEW AND EVALUATION PROCESS
The journal adopts a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential from each other.
Preliminary Editorial Review: Following submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial evaluation by the editorial office in terms of its compliance with the aims and scope of the journal, writing guidelines, formal requirements, ethical principles, and similarity status. Manuscripts that are found unsuitable may be returned to the authors or rejected without being sent for peer review.
Peer Review: Manuscripts that pass the preliminary review are sent to at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. Reviewers evaluate the manuscripts in terms of their scientific contribution, methodological adequacy, validity of the findings, and contribution to the literature. Reviewers are obliged to inform the editor in the event of any conflict of interest. If the reviewers report conflict with one another, a third reviewer may be appointed, or the editor may make the final decision in accordance with COPE principles.
Editorial Decision: Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editor makes one of the following decisions: acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection. Authors of manuscripts requiring minor or major revision are informed by the Editor-in-Chief. The decision letter includes the reviewers’ and editor’s comments in detail and specifies the deadline for submission of the revised manuscript.
A revised manuscript that is accepted is subject to final checks by the editorial office before publication. Authors review and approve the manuscript before publication. Articles are published online in their final PDF version.
8. REVISION PROCESS
For manuscripts for which revision is requested, authors are required to provide a detailed response to the reviewers’ comments. All revisions made must be clearly indicated and submitted together with the revised version of the manuscript.
Minor revisions must be submitted via DergiPark within 10 days of the date on which the reviewer reports are communicated to the author, whereas major revisions must be submitted within 15 days. Revised manuscripts may be sent for an additional round of peer review if deemed necessary. A revised manuscript that is accepted undergoes final editorial checks in preparation for publication. Authors are required to review and approve the final proof before publication.
Changes in authorship may only be made during the revision process and must be justified by the need for additional contribution to the study. No authorship changes may be made after acceptance. Any change in authorship must be clearly stated in the response file and approved by all authors. The corresponding author bears primary responsibility for all such changes, including any modification in the order of authors in the revised version.
9. PUBLICATION POLICY
The ITU Journal of Food Science and Technology is an open-access, peer-reviewed journal published twice a year.
The journal aims to publish original, high-quality studies that make a significant contribution to the field. Ethical publishing, editorial independence, scientific integrity, and transparency are fundamental principles throughout all stages of the publication process.
Manuscripts submitted to the journal may be written in Turkish or English. Manuscripts written in Turkish must include an English abstract, while manuscripts written in English must include a Turkish abstract.
The journal does not charge any fee for manuscript submission or publication. All published articles are freely accessible to readers.
10. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Authors, reviewers, and editors are required to disclose any financial, institutional, academic, or personal conflicts of interest that may influence the evaluation, interpretation, or publication process.
Authors: Authors must clearly disclose in the manuscript any financial support, sponsorship, project funding, or institutional affiliation that may affect the design, conduct, interpretation, or results of the study. All support received must be stated in the Funding or Acknowledgements section, together with the relevant project number.
Reviewers: Reviewers must decline to evaluate a manuscript and inform the editor if they have any conflict of interest, competition, close collaboration, or potential bias related to the authors, institutions, or subject of the study.
Editors: Editors must not act as decision-makers for manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest. In such cases, the manuscript is assigned to another editor to preserve impartiality. Editors take the necessary measures to ensure reviewer neutrality and to minimize bias. If the Editorial Board identifies any conflict of interest, it reserves the right to reject the manuscript. Throughout all processes, COPE ethical principles and transparent publishing practices are followed.
11. FINANCIAL SUPPORT
If the study has been supported by any institution, this support must be clearly stated. Under the heading Funding or Acknowledgements, support received from an institution or a BAP project must be indicated together with the relevant project number. In addition, individuals who have supported the research process, such as during data collection, but who do not qualify for authorship, may be acknowledged.
12. USE OF AI-SUPPORTED TECHNOLOGIES
It is essential to adhere to scientific ethics when using generative artificial intelligence. The purpose and scope of GenAI should not include stages of research that require high-level skills, experience, and expertise, such as hypothesis development, discussion, interpretation, and application. GenAI may be used for literature review, data analysis, translation or language editing, data labeling, and data quality assessment; however, the ultimate responsibility for the scientific accuracy, consistency, and impartiality of the resulting text rests with the author(s). For further guidance, authors may refer to the YÖK Ethics Guide.
If generative artificial intelligence is used:
Authors must specify which tool and version were used and at which stage of the study it was applied.
Content generated by GenAI must be reviewed in accordance with academic rigor and ethical standards, thoroughly checked, and properly documented. The accuracy of the content remains the responsibility of the author(s).
The content must be critically evaluated, and any potential biases arising from GenAI must be carefully assessed and approved by the researchers. The authors remain fully responsible for the content, conclusions, and arguments presented in the manuscript.
Authors may use GenAI tools provided that these conditions are met; however, they are required to submit a written declaration and notification to the journal’s editorial board. Where deemed necessary, the editorial office may request additional explanations or documentation regarding the use of artificial intelligence.
13. POST-PUBLICATION PROCESSES
Errors or issues identified after publication are evaluated through appropriate editorial procedures, depending on their scope and nature. The journal is committed to preserving the accuracy and reliability of the scientific record.
Corrections
Technical or typographical errors that do not affect the results of the study, as well as errors that are important in terms of accuracy but do not alter the main findings, may be corrected.
Erratum: for errors originating from the publisher or the editorial office
Corrigendum: for errors originating from the author(s)
All corrections are published as separate records and are clearly linked to the relevant article. These records explicitly state the reason, scope, and date of the change. In addition, any changes made to online articles are clearly indicated and an update history is provided.
Requests for correction may be submitted not only by the authors, but also by readers, reviewers, editors, or relevant institutions. To request a correction, the title of the article and a brief description of the issue must be submitted to the editorial office. After evaluating the request, the editorial office determines the appropriate course of action.
All published corrections and notices are properly documented, linked to the relevant article, and presented in a manner that preserves the integrity of the publication record.
Retraction
A retraction decision may be made in cases involving serious scientific error, fabricated or falsified data, plagiarism or duplicate publication, major ethical violations such as lack of ethics committee approval, official permission, or informed consent, copyright infringement, or other circumstances that undermine the reliability of the study.
Retraction procedures are carried out in accordance with COPE recommendations and widely accepted ethical publishing practices. The status of the retracted article is clearly indicated, and the reason for retraction is transparently documented.
Retraction is implemented to preserve the accuracy of the scientific record and to protect readers from misleading findings. In such cases, the reasons are clearly stated and the status of the relevant article is explicitly indicated.
In order for a retraction request to be considered, the authors must submit a signed petition bearing the signatures of all co-authors and providing a detailed explanation of the reasons for retraction. Once the request is approved by the board, the article is officially retracted and the authors are informed.
14. CONFIDENTIALITY
All manuscripts submitted to the journal are evaluated confidentially and are not shared with third parties until publication.
Editors may share manuscripts only with the reviewers assigned to evaluate them; reviewers, in turn, may neither share nor use the materials they receive for any other purpose. A double-blind peer review system is applied, under which both author and reviewer identities are kept mutually confidential.
Reviewers must inform the editor if they identify any conflict of interest or risk of bias. They are also expected to confidentially report to the editor any substantial similarity or suspected ethical misconduct identified during the review process. In suspicious cases, the editor follows COPE recommendations.
15. COPYRIGHT
Before publication, the corresponding author is required to sign and submit the copyright transfer form to the editorial office. Authors may freely use their published articles for non-commercial purposes, provided that the integrity of the work is preserved and the original authors, citation details, and publisher are clearly indicated.
All published articles are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license. This license permits the use, distribution, and reproduction of published works in any medium, provided that the original source is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.
Authors may use their published works freely for non-commercial purposes; however, the integrity of the work must be preserved, and full bibliographic citation must be clearly provided, including the authors, journal title, article title, volume, year, and page numbers. Copyright notices or warnings must not be removed.
16. COMPLAINT AND APPEAL POLICY
The journal is committed to handling complaints and appeals related to editorial decisions, the peer review process, allegations of ethical misconduct, or publication policies in a fair, impartial, and timely manner.
Authors may submit appeals regarding editorial decisions to the editorial office in writing, together with a reasoned explanation. The appeal must clearly state why the decision should be reconsidered. Additional documents or explanations may be requested where necessary.
Ethical complaints, allegations of plagiarism, declarations of conflict of interest, or notifications concerning editorial procedures are also examined by the editorial office. Applications may, where necessary, be evaluated by the Editorial Board; in appropriate cases, an independent opinion may be sought and COPE procedures may be followed.
Complaint and appeal processes are conducted in a manner that preserves editorial impartiality and the integrity of the scientific record.
17. ARCHIVING AND DIGITAL PRESERVATION POLICY
The journal places importance on the long-term preservation and continued accessibility of its published content. All articles published in the journal are made available through the DergiPark/OJS infrastructure and benefit from the digital preservation and archiving capabilities provided by the platform.
