Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity

* Makes and implements editorial prevention against variants of Plagiarism containing all scientific definitions.
* Requests documents for Ethical Committe Permissions from authors during the article submission process
* Strictly examines the unethical behaviors of authors such as self-citation during the article pre-review and article review process.
* Strictly scrutinize ethical concerns such as "ghost author".
* It examines the data in cases that may cause publication concerns, as ensuring the transparency of the authors
* It asks academics with editorial duties to undertake not to communicate with authors except during article review processes.
* Editorial boards knows that the quality of JGEDC is directly related to its commitment to ethical principles.
* The editorial team is aware that their role in JGEDC is not a factor to increase their popularity, each member gives their commitment.
* Collaborates with authors' institutions on ethical issues
* The increase in indexing and the popularity of the journal never changes its strict adherence to the application of ethical principles.
* The authors, editors, referees and members of the editorial board are informed about compliance with ethical principles and commitments are requested.
* The authors, referees, editors and editorial board members do not know about ethical issues as an excuse, and they are dismissed from JGEDC.
* All information brought to the literature, practices, models and experiences by COPE must be known and applied by the stakeholders.
* Regarding the hesitation experienced in practices related to ethical problems; Under the chairmanship of the chief editor, the JGEDC Ethics Unit (JEU), which consists of 4 members of the editorial board and 5 people in total, undertakes the task of consulting. In order to increase the accuracy of its decisions, the JEU should seek advice from institutions that work with international ethical issues.
* The concept of double-bilinded peerreview is made a fact by choosing independent and expert reviewers with all its details, it is never left in discourse, it is applied. For this case, the review process reports recorded in the Dergipark Journal System are always available as proof/evidence.

Now let's explain some of the basics for authors, reviewers and editors.

Plagiarism
Plagiarism the unethical act of copying someone else’s prior ideas, processes, results or words without explicit acknowledgement of the original author and source. Self-plagiarism occurs when an author utilizes large part of his/her own previously published work without using appropriate references. This can range from getting the same manuscript published in multiple journals to modifying a previously published manuscript with some new data.
Types of plagiarism; Full Plagiarism: Previously published content without any changes to the text, idea and grammar is considered as full plagiarism. It involves presenting exact text from a source as one’s own. Partial Plagiarism: If content is a mixture from multiple different sources, where the author has extensively rephrased text, then it is known as partial plagiarism. Self-Plagiarism: When an author reuses complete or portions of their pre-published research, then it is known as self-plagiarism. Complete self-plagiarism is a case when an author republishes their own previously published work in a new journal.

Measures, Obligations and Responsibilities of JGEDC for Plagiarism
The Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity (JGEDC) is strictly against any unethical act of copying or plagiarism in any form. Plagiarism is said to have occurred when large portions of a manuscript have been copied from existing previously published resources. All manuscripts submitted for publication to JGEDC are cross-checked for plagiarism using Turnitin/ iThenticate software.

Procedure
JGEDC meticulously requests and checks plagiarism reports from authors for their article submissions (Similarity over 12% is unacceptable). Papers found to be plagiarized during initial stages of review are out-rightly rejected and not considered for publication in the journal. In case a manuscript is found to be plagiarized after publication, the Editor-in-Chief will conduct preliminary investigation, may be with the help of a suitable committee constituted for the purpose. If the manuscript is found to be plagiarized beyond the acceptable limits, the journal will contact the author’s Affiliation and Funding Agency, if any. A determination of misconduct will lead JGEDC to run a statement bidirectionally linked online to and from the original paper, to note the plagiarism and provide a reference to the plagiarized material. The paper containing the plagiarism will also be marked on each pages. This situation is conveyed to the relevant unit (JEU) in a report.

Figure 1. Plagiarism Intervention Flow Chart

Plagiarism Concern Status: JGEDC respects intellectual property and aims at protecting and promoting original work of its authors. Manuscripts containing plagiarized material are against the standards of quality, research and innovation. Hence, all authors submitting articles to JGEDC are expected to abide ethical standards and abstain from plagiarism, in any form.
Author(s) Request for Defense: In case, an author is found to be suspected of plagiarism in a submitted or published manuscript then, JGEDC shall contact the author (s) to submit his / her (their) explanation within two weeks, which may be forwarded to the JEU constituted for the purpose, for further course of action. If JGEDC does not receive any response from the author within the stipulated time period, then the director of authors’ affiliations to which the author is affiliated shall be contacted to take strict action against the concerned author.
Ethics Unit Report Preparation: JEU prepares a report containing the opinions and evidences of the plagiarism case by taking the defenses of the authors. He gives this report to the chief editor.

Article Related Sanction: JGEDC shall take serious action against published manuscripts found to contain plagiarism and shall completely remove them from JGEDC journal website (https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/jgedc) and other third party websites where the paper is listed and indexed. The moment, any article published in JGEDC database is reported to be plagiarized, JGEDC will constitute a JEU to investigate the same. Upon having established that the manuscript is plagiarized from some previously published work, JGEDC shall support the original author and manuscript irrespective of the publisher and may take any or all of the following immediate actions or follow the additional course of actions as recommended by the committee:
JGEDC shall remove the PDF copy of the published manuscript from the website (https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/jgedc) and disable all links to full text article. The term Plagiarized Manuscript shall be appended to the published manuscript title. JGEDC shall disable the author account with the journal and reject all future submissions from the author for a period of 3 years or even ban the authors permanently. JGEDC may also display the list of such authors along with their full contact details on the JGEDC website. (https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/jgedc)
Sanction on Authors: JGEDC editorial office shall immediately contact the Head of the Affiliations to which the author(s) is (are) affiliated to take strict action against the concerned author(s).

Gifted Education and Creativity Researchers (JGEDC' authors) adhere to legal regulations in the planning, conduct and reporting processes while conducting their research involving human participants and vulnerable populations. It conducts its research by adhering to the above-mentioned reports and guidelines. Since the group with giftedness also carries potential obstacles and risks (such as emotional sensitivity, twice exceptionality e.g.), it should adhere to the following points;

All stakeholders of JGEDC in the editorial process (such as publishers, editors, referees) must behave in strict adherence to ethical codes and principles regarding human participants and vulnerable populations.

Ethical Duties and Responsibilities of All Stakeholders Related to Editorial Processes
In the creation of this section, the knowledge, experience and experience of Scopus-Elsevier and Web of Science-Clarivate, which are the most important indexes of the world, in the field of academic publishing were used. We also inform our stakeholders such as authors, referees and editors that we are committed to all ethical principles they have stated and agreed upon.

Duties of Authors
* The author must be honest and transparent in all the information he gives, such as the originality of his research, author contributions, and funds received.
* The author should not communicate with the members of the editorial board in any way that may affect the refereeing processes of his article.
* The author should first convey his problems related to the editorial processes to the editor-in-chief. It should not engage in an unethical and legally criminal behavior in the face of JGEDC's unfair, groundless, and unsubstantiated accusations, such as defaming it in different environments.
* The author should not submit his/her article without being aware of all JGEDC's policies and author's guideline. JGEDC's advisory and author support units are in charge of this. It does not engage in careless, unconscious and erroneous submit and review processes only for the rapid operation of the publication processes of the article.
* The author must be willing to apply all the details in the authors guideline. He should not enter into a bargain with the editor, as I will do some matters later.
* Authors give the right to access the research data and to request it when necessary, to the editorial board as stated in the guidelines. In this regard, it complies with the principles of transparency and accountability.
* Plagiarim (similarity) Report presented by author(s) without manipulation. It never uses software that changes words without changing the meaning of quotes from other sources. Presents an original research that he has constructed in his own sentences.
* It uses software such as Turnitin, Ithenticate to receive Plagiarism reports.
* Author(s) should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.
* The author acts with fairness and ethical sensitivity in the matter that contributors and non-contributors should be written as article authors or thanked in the Acknowledgment section.
* Knows in which aspects the concept of authorship is valid. Definitely identifies the author's contributions in the Acknowledgment section.
* The author acts within the framework of ethical principles with the relevant institutions in terms of specifying the permissions received by the research process in the article or obtaining separate permission to be specified.
* The Ethical Committee Permission receives the for all research and adds it to the Dergipark Journal System during the article submission process. In the Acknowledgment section, it specifies the date of the decision and the number of decisions.
* All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.
* Authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.
* If the author discovers something fundamental, serious and inaccurate in his article after the article is published, he notifies the editor. This puts the author under an important responsibility. Options to retract or publishing of correct paper are implemented with editorial cooperation. It can never exhibit a behavior such as avoiding cooperation in this process.

Duties of Reviewers
*  The reviewer should be aware that it is a very influential factor in the development of the article and the editor's decision.
* When the reviewer feels inadequate to evaluate an article, he should ask for another reviewer to be assigned to the article.
* Reviewer should not discuss the information and ideas in an article they are reviewing with others.
* The reviewer should not use derogatory, commanding or humiliating expressions in his comments about the article. Should not criticize the author inappropriately. While expressing their views, they should support them with arguments.
* JGEDC's review form is very detailed. This form has been prepared to include all the details of the article. The reviewer should not be in the act of filling in the fields that need to be filled in this form in a short and vague manner such as "it is appropriate, good".
* The reviewer should check whether the author has deliberately or mistakenly cited to any source in the literature, and the editor should warn about this issue.
* The reviewer should check whether the author does self-citation, dominate the author's own work or a research group's work in the academic community, cite biasedly, and popularize it, and report this situation to the editor with its arguments.
* The reviewer should notify the editor of the eligibility for his appointment and when he can review the article. It should not act recklessly to interfere with the journal's workflow and to waste the valuable time of the author.

Updated 14th April 2023