PUBLICATION POLICY OF JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC PERSPECTIVE ON SOCIAL STUDIES (JAPSS)
1. Journal of Academic Perspective on Social Studies (JAPSS) is an international, free peer-reviewed journal, in which studies are published annually in English, German and Turkish. Special or additional issues may also be published if necessary. Journal of Academic Perspective on Social Studies (JAPSS) publishes original empirical and theoretical studies in the field of social sciences (it includes many social science branches such as management sciences, healthcare mangement, communication, philosophy, psychology, sociology, social work, economy, international relations, political science, tourism, law and public administration) that analyze, research, discuss and promote humanities-related social policies or practices based on individuals, families, societies, organizations, countries.
2.All rights of the articles decided to be published in JAPSS are transferred to the journal during the publishing process. The copyright transfer of the articles is taken by filling in and signing the form presented on the journal website. Publications of the authors who do not send this form cannot be published.
3.At JAPSS, the studies are taken into consideration together with the Plagiarism Report (IThenticate, Turnitin).The plagiarism rate should be less than 15%. If a plagiarism report is not included or the plagiarism rate is high, the editor has the right to reject the article directly.
4. All legal, economic and ethical obligations of the articles sent to JAPSS belong to the authors. The articles sent to JAPSS to be published should not have been published in any media before and it should not be in the process of publication evaluation when added to the system. In addition, the symposium papers can be published provided that the place of presentation, meeting and the date are recorded and the full text version is not published elsewhere. However, the responsibility of any problem likely to arise from this publication activity belongs to the author. Besides, Ethical Committee approval must be obtained for studies on clinical and experimental human and animals requiring an Ethics Committee decision, this approval must be stated in the article and must be submitted as an appendix at the end of the article. Publications that do not meet this requirement are not acceptable.
5. Articles that do not comply with the Style Guidelines in the Author Guidelines tab of JAPSS may not be considered.
6. Journal Refereeing and Evaluation Process: Double-blind review method is applied in our journal. The referees are not informed about who the submitted article belongs to, and the author(s) are not informed about the identities of the reviewers. All evaluation processes and referee reports are stored in a digital archive. Articles in which the referees give negative reports are not published and are not returned to their author(s); administrative and judicial responsibility cannot be accepted in this regard. In the articles, the referees' correction requests are sent to the author(s) for necessary changes. The authors take into account the requests, suggestions and warnings of the referees and the editor. However, the authors can object to the referee's decisions and the issues they disagree with by stating their reasons. In this case, the opinion of another referee is sought. In cases where one of the referee's reports is positive and the other is negative, the article is sent to a third referee. It is the author's responsibility to submit the corrected article text to the journal within the specified time. Editor(s) have the authority to make minor non-essential corrections in the articles to be published. Referee opinions only express opinions to the editors in making the final decision. The final decision belongs to the editors.
In our journal, the evaluation process of the articles is carried out according to the following points:
• Articles in accordance with scientific ethical rules; It is evaluated by the editor and/or the members of the editorial board in terms of purpose, scope, method and writing principles. After the pre-check by the journal editors, articles are evaluated In our journal.
• The articles that are suitable for evaluation are primarily directed to two referees who are suitable for the field with their scientific studies, to be evaluated without specifying the identity of the author (blind refereeing).
• Within 7 days, the referee has the right to accept or reject the evaluation task. The referee who accepts the assignment is given 15 days to evaluate the article. The speed of the evaluation process of the articles is the responsibility of the referee.
• If both referees give the opinion " publishable ", the articles are published in the volume and number to be determined by the editorial board of the journal as soon as possible.
• In case one of the referees gives a positive opinion and the other a negative opinion; the article is sent to a third referee. In this case, the publication of the article depends on the report of the third referee.
• The articles are not returned whether they are published or not. The authors have to take into account the criticisms and suggestions of the referees regarding the corrections of the article they sent.
• It is the author's responsibility to deliver the corrected article text to the journal within the specified time. When necessary, the corrected text can be re-examined by the referees. The authors are not informed about the identities of the referees, and the referees are not informed about the authors and the article (Blind Refereeing).
• Referee evaluation reports are stored in the journal's digital archive.
ETHICAL PRINCIPLES OF JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC PERSPECTIVE ON SOCIAL STUDIES (JAPSS)
1. All legal, economic and ethical obligations of the articles sent to JAPSS belong to the authors. The articles sent to JAPSS to be published should not have been published in any media before and it should not be in the process of publication evaluation when added to the system. In addition, the symposium papers can be published provided that the place of presentation, meeting and the date are recorded and the full text version is not published elsewhere. However, the responsibility of any problem likely to arise from this publication activity belongs to the author. Besides, Ethical Committee approval must be obtained for studies on clinical and experimental human and animals requiring an Ethics Committee decision, this approval must be stated in the article and must be submitted as an appendix at the end of the article. Publications that do not meet this requirement are not acceptable.
2. The sensibility of the article regarding ethical issues and ethics committee approval should be clearly stated in the methods section of the relevant article.
In the methods section of the article, information about the permission (board name, date, and issue/paper number) should be added and documented.
3. Research that requires ethics committee approval;
• All kinds of researches conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from the participants by using survey, interview, focus group work, observation, experiment, interview techniques,
• The use of humans and animals (including material/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes,
• Clinical studies on humans,
• Research on animals,
• Retrospective studies by the personal data protection law.
4. In addition, except for the permissions of the Ethics Committee
• In case reports, information about signing the informed consent form should be included in the article.
• It should be expressed that the approval document has been obtained from the research institution (MEB, Ministries, etc.).
• It should be stated that permission has been obtained from the owners for the use of scales, questionnaires, and photographs belonging to others.
• It should be stated that copyright regulations are complied with for the intellectual and artistic works used.
5. Studies that do not require ethics committee approval;
• Systematic reviews, discussion articles, and secondary analyzes of appropriately anonymized datasets from regularly published study types do not require ethics committee review. However, in such studies, the ethical issues should be clearly stated in the methods section of the article.
6. Please, benefit from the diagrams in the link whether the studies require ethics committee approval or not. https://confluence.ulakbim.gov.tr/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97583694&preview=/97583694/100434212/EtikKurulOnayBelgesiSemas%C4%B1.pdf
7. The articles should follow “Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive”. Please, access this directive from the link on the side.https://www.yok.gov.tr/Sayfalar/Kurumsal/mevzuat/bilimsel-arastirma-ve-etik-yonetmeligi.aspx
The article acceptance and publication processes implemented at JAPSS are the basis for the development and distribution of information impartially and respectably. The processes implemented in this direction are directly reflected in the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support the authors. Peer-reviewed studies embody and support the scientific method. At this point, all stakeholders of the process (authors, readers, and researchers, publishers, referees, and editors) must comply with the standards for ethical principles.
Within the scope of publication ethics of JAPSS, all stakeholders are expected to bear the following ethical responsibilities. The ethical duties and responsibilities below are formed as to guidelines and policies published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) published as open access.
8- Ethical Responsibilities of Authors
The authors who submit their manuscripts to JAPSS are expected to comply with the following ethical responsibilities:
• Author(s) must submit original studies to the journal. If they utilize or use other studies, they must make the in-text and end-text references accurately and completely.
• People who have not contributed to the study at the intellectual level should not be indicated as author.
• If the manuscripts submitted to be published are subject of conflicting interests or relations, these must be explained.
• During the review process of their manuscripts, author(s) may be asked to supply raw data. In such a case, author(s) should be ready to submit such data and information to the editorial and scientific boards.
• Author(s) should document that they have the participants' consent and the necessary permissions related with the sharing and research/analysis of the data that are used.
• Author(s) bears the responsibility to inform the editor of the journal or publisher if they happen to notice a mistake in their study which is in early release or publication process and to cooperate with the editors during the correction or withdrawal process.
• Authors cannot submit their studies to multiple journals simultaneously. Each submission can be made only after the previous one is completed. A study published in another journal cannot be submitted to JAPSS.
• Author responsibilities given in a study (e.g.: adding an author, reordering of author names) whose review process has begun cannot be changed.
9- Ethical Responsibilities of Editors
The editor and field editors of JAPSS should hold the following ethical responsibilities that are based on the guides "COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" published as open Access by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
General duties and responsibilities
Editors are responsible for each study published in JAPSS. In this respect, the editors have the following roles and responsibilities:
• Making efforts to meet the demand for knowledge from readers and authors,
• Ensuring the continuous development of the journal,
• Managing the procedures aimed to improve the quality of the studies published in the journal,
• Supporting freedom of expression,
• Ensuring academic integrity,
• Following the procedures without making concessions on intellectual property rights and ethical standards,
• Being transparent and clear in issues that require correction or explanation.
Relationships with Readers
• Editors must make decisions taking into consideration the knowledge, skills and expectations of all readers, researchers and practitioners need.
• They must also ensure that the published studies contribute to literature and be original.
• Moreover, they must take notice of the feedback received from researchers and practitioners and provide explanatory and informative feedback.
Relationships with Authors
• Editors have the following duties and responsibilities in their relations with authors:
• Editors must make positive or negative decisions about the studies' importance, originality, validity, clarity in wording and suitability with the journal's aims and objectives.
• Editors must accept the studies that are within the scope of publication into pre review process unless there are serious problems with the study.
• Editors must not ignore positive suggestions made by reviewers unless there are serious problems with the study.
• New editors, unless there are serious issues, must not change the previous editor's decisions about the studies.
• "Blind Review and Review Process" must be published and editors must prevent possible diversions in the defined processes.
• Editors must publish an "Author's Guide" that is comprehensive enough in answering queries by authors. This guide must be updated regularly.
• Authors should be provided with explanatory and informative feedback.
Relationships with Reviewers
Editors have the following duties and responsibilities in their relations with reviewers:
Editors must
• choose reviewers according to the subject of the study.
• provide the information and guidance reviewers may need during the review process.
• observe whether there are conflicting interests between reviewers and authors.
• keep the identities of reviewers confidential in blind review.
• encourage the reviewers to review the manuscript in an unbiased, scientific and objective tone.
• evaluate reviewers regularly based on criteria like performance and timing.
• develop practices and policies that increase the performance of reviewers.
• take necessary steps to update the reviewer pool dynamically.
• prevent unkind and unscientific reviews.
• make effort to ensure the reviewer pool has a wide range.
Relationships with the Editorial Board
Editors must make sure that the members of the editorial board follow the procedures in accordance with the publication policies and guidelines and must inform the members about the publication policies and developments. The editors must also train new members of the editorial board and provide the information they need.
Moreover, editors must
• ensure that the members of the editorial board review the manuscripts in an unbiased and independent manner.
• select the new members of the editorial board from those who can contribute to the journal and are qualified enough.
• send manuscripts for review based on the subject of expertise of the editorial board members.
• regularly communicate with the editorial board.
• arrange regular meetings with the editorial board for the development of publication policies and the journal.
Relationships with the Journal's Owner and Publisher
The relationship between the editors and publisher is based on the principle of the independency of editors. All the decisions made by the editors are independent of the publisher and the owner of the journal as required by the agreement made between editors and publisher.
Editorial and Blind Review Processes
Editors are obliged to comply with the policies of "Blind Review and Review Process" stated in the journal's publication policies. Therefore, the editors ensure that each manuscript is reviewed in an unbiased, fair and timely manner.
Quality Assurance
Editors must make sure that articles in the journal are published in accordance with the publication policies of the journal and international standards.
Protection of Personal Information
Editors are supposed to protect the personal information related with the subjects or visuals in the studies being reviewed, and to reject the study if there is no documentation of the subjects' consent. Furthermore, editors are supposed to protect the personal information of the authors, reviewers and readers.
Encouraging Ethical Rules and Protection of Human and Animal Rights
Editors are supposed to protect human and animal rights in the studies being reviewed and must reject the experimental studies which do not have ethical and related committee’s approval about the population given in such studies.
Precautions against possible Abuse and Malpractice
Editors are supposed to take precautions against possible abuse and malpractice. They must conduct investigations meticulously and objectively in determining and evaluating complaints about such situations. They must also share the results of the investigation.
Ensuring Academic Integrity
Editors must make sure that the mistakes, inconsistencies or misdirections in studies are corrected quickly.
Protection of Intellectual Property Rights
Editors are responsible for protecting the intellectual property rights of all the articles published in the journal and the rights of the journal and author(s) in cases where these rights are violated. Also, editors must take the necessary precautions in order to prevent the content of all published articles from violating the intellectual property rights of other publications.
Constructiveness and Openness to Discussion
Editors must
• pay attention to the convincing criticism about studies published in the journal and must have a constructive attitude towards such criticism.
• grant the right of reply to the author(s) of the criticized study.
• not ignore or exclude the study that include negative results.
Complaints
Editors must examine the complaints from authors, reviewers or readers and respond to them in an explanatory and enlightening manner.
Political and Economic Apprehensions
Neither the owner of the journal, publisher or any other political or economic factor can influence the independent decision taking of the editors.
Conflicting Interests
Editors, acknowledging that there may be conflicting interests between reviewers and other editors, guarantee that the publication process of the manuscripts will be completed in an independent and unbiased manner
10- Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
The fact that all manuscripts are reviewed through "Blind Review" has a direct influence on the publication quality. This process ensures confidentiality by objective and independent review. The review process at JAPSS is carried out on the principle of double-blind review. Reviewers do not contact the authors directly, and the reviews and comments are conveyed through the journal management system. In this process, the reviewer views on the evaluation forms and full texts are assigned to the author(s) by the editor.
Therefore, the reviewers doing review work for JAPSS are supposed to bear the following ethical responsibilities:
Reviewers must
• agree to review only in their subject of expertise.
• review in an unbiased and confidential manner.
• inform the editor of the journal if they think that they encounter conflict of interests and decline to review the manuscript during the review process.
• dispose the manuscripts they have reviewed in accordance with the principle of confidentiality after the review process. Reviewers can use the final versions of the manuscripts they have reviewed only after publication.
• review the manuscript objectively and only in terms of its content and ensure that nationality, gender, religious and political beliefs, and economic apprehension do not influence the review.
• review the manuscript in a constructive and kind tone, avoid making personal comments including hostility, slander and insult.
• review the manuscript they have agreed to review on time and in accordance with the ethical rules stated above.
11- Ethical Responsibilities of Publisher
Publisher of JAPSS is conscious of the fact that they must observe the ethical responsilities below and act accordingly:
• Editors are responsible for all the processes that the manuscripts submitted to JAPSS will go through. Within this framework, ignoring the economic or political interests, the decision-makers are the editors.
• The publisher undertakes to have an independent editorial decision made.
• The publisher protects the intellectual property rights of all the articles published in JAPSS and holds the responsibility to keep a record of each unpublished article.
• The publisher bears all the responsibility to take the precautions against scientific abuse, fraud and plagiarism.
12- Unethical Behaviour
Should you encounter any unethical act or content in JAPSS apart from the ethical responsibilities listed above, please notify the journal by e-mail at journalaposs@gmail.com
April 27, 2023
Page
1-12