Developing and Examining the Responsible AI Use Knowledge Scale (RAUKS): Initial Evidence of a Three-Factor Structure among College Students in Teacher Education

SUBMISSION

We recommend that you carefully review the Review process page as well as the Author Guidelines. Manuscripts that do not adhere to the Author Guidelines may be returned to the corresponding author for technical revisions before undergoing double-blind peer review or be rejected in case of many violations detected. Authors need to register with the journal prior to submitting all manuscripts online at https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/joltida or, if already registered, can simply log on and go through the five-step on-line submission process. For questions about submitting a manuscript, contact Editor-in-Chief of JOLTIDA, Dr. Mehmet Akif Ocak, at joltida.info@gmail.com

PREPARATION OF THE MANUSCRIPT
 

For manuscript submission, the following items are mandatory: 1. Full manuscript, 2. Copyright form, 3. Cover letter, 4. Title page, 5. Ethics Committee Permission Letter, 6. Similarity report,  7. Author(s) Contribution Form , 8. AI Usage Declaration Form 

Optional items:   Proof reading letters
 

1. FULL MANUSCRIPT: Authors are required to follow APA 7.0 style for preparation of their manuscripts. Please check with General Guidelines below.

Download

2. COPYRIGHT FORM:  Copyright form must include all authors' names and contact details must be signed by the corresponding author.

Download

3. COVER LETTER:

Authors have to submit a cover letter with each manuscript. The cover letter should articulate/confirm the following information: 

*-Name of original research/review article entitled "title of article" for consideration by JOLTIDA.
*-Submitted manuscript is original and has not been published elsewhere, nor is it currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. 
*-The author(s) confirms full access to all aspects of the research and writing process, and will take final responsibility for the paper.
*-Brief description of the research you are reporting on your article, why it is important, and why you think the readers of the journal would be interested in it.(Do not just copy your abstract into your cover letter)
*-Conflicts of Interest. The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest related to this study. They have no financial, personel, or institutional relationships that could influence the research, analysis, or findings presented in this manuscript. If any potential conflicts arise, they must be disclosed in your covert letter accordingly. In short, please declare any conflicts of interest, or confirm there are none in Cover Letter. 
*-Authors’ names and affiliations do not appear anywhere on the manuscript for ensure scientific integrity.

Download

4.TITLE PAGE: Title page must include title of the manuscript, authors' name, institution, faculty, department, country, e-mail, ORCID, study fields, correspondence author's name, contact email.

Download

5. ETHICS COMITTEE PERMISSION LETTER (Updated):
 

• All candidate articles (including literature reviews, meta-analysis, bibliometric analysis) must submit a paper requesting clearance from the ethics committee.
• Researchers should submit the "does not require ethics committee approval" form to be obtained from their institution's ethics committee in order to conduct studies that don't need such permission.
• Prior to starting the study's data gathering procedure, independent researchers should apply to the ethical committees of the institutions in their province and acquire a letter of clearance from the committee.
• The ethics committee's thesis approval is sufficient to submit for publications based on  theses. The approval of a separate ethical committee is not required for the articles produced from theses. 

6. SIMILARITY REPORT:  The original similarity report of the manuscript  in pdf format must be uploaded and the similarity rate must  be below 10%.

7.AUTHOR(S) CONTRUBITON FORM: To be an author, a person must have made substantive contributions to the study by fulfilling at least 3 of the criteria presented in the following table. All authors are also expected to fulfill the first 3 criteria stated below:

Download

8. AI USAGE DECLARATION FORM

Download

--

GENERAL GUIDELINES:

Margins should be 1½" on all sides, left justified only. Type must be a minimum of 12-point font size. Double-space throughout and arrange the text in the following sequence: title, affiliation, abstract, main text (figures and tables included), references. Number the pages consecutively, in the upper right-hand corner. Number the lines continuously beginning with the main text. Include a short title in the header of each page, just above the page number.

We encourage authors to use headings and subheadings throughout the manuscript. We also encourage the use of diagrams, tables, charts, illustrations, and photos; however, authors should place them in the body of the text.

Authors are required to follow APA 7.0 style for preparation of their manuscripts. Please strictly follow the requirements written in the APA style and place your title, abstract, key words, main text, tables and graphics (with captions or titles) within the text as this will produce document that is easier to review. Note that a corresponding author information is required on the first page of the template. Authors are also encouraged to write in active voice.

Language. Manuscripts should be written in English language.

Title. Title of the study must not exceed limit of 15 words. Please use Times New Roman, 14 pt for the title.

Author(s). Provide author names, affiliations, and e-mail addresses.

Abstract. The abstract should deliver the essence of the manuscript in a concise or clear academic writing. Please provide a structured abstract using the following headings: Background, Purposes, Methodology/Approach, Findings, and Discussion. The abstract must be Times New Roman 11pt, double line spacing, justified, and should not exceed 250 words. The abstract should not contain any undefined acronym or abbreviation.

Keywords. Include 5 keywords for indexing purposes. Keywords should be written in italic.

Corresponding author. Provide the corresponding author along with; (In footer section of the first page)

• E-mail
• Full mailing address (including phone number)

Main text. The main body of the manuscript should not exceed 10,000 words. Type face should be Times New Roman, 12 pt, and justified. Avoid footers and footnotes except in tables, where needed. Authors should clearly articulate implications and recommendations for educators and scholars in the discussion section.

Headings. 3 levels of headings should be used as the title:

• First level, all capital letters, bold and centered
• The second level, the first letters capitalized, left justified, bold and not left indent. Second level headings should be used appropriately to describe the subtopics of the main topic.
• Third level, the first letters capitalized, bold, italic and left indented 1.25 cm (0.5 inch). Use third level headings to describe subtopics of topics in the second level headings.

Tables. Table titles should be placed at the top of the related table. Table titles should be written in Times New Roman, 12 pt, and justified. All tables should be referenced in the text of the manuscript.

Figures. Figure titles should be placed at the bottom of the related figure. Figure titles should be written in Times New Roman, 12 pt, and justified. All figures should be referenced in the text of the manuscript.

Acknowledgement. This is an optional section. At the end of the paper, before the references, the acknowledgments should be given if there is a source of funding that contributed to the manuscript. You may also recognize other people who made contributions to the manuscript.

References. All the references should be presented according to Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th edition, 2020) (APA; https://apastyle.apa.org/). All the resources cited in the main text should be listed in the references. For double-checking of the refereed resources, Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) information on each reference should be also described. The references should be written in Times New Roman, 11 pt. Do NOT use any reference formatting software (e.g., End Notes).

Appendices. All the appendices should be presented after the references. Please use an identifying capital letter for each Appendix (Appendix A, Appendix B). Please refer to each Appendix in the manuscript.
 

Submission Preparation Checklist. As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

1. Author guidelines has been used for preparation of the manuscripts.
2. The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
3. The submission file is in OpenOffice, Microsoft Word, RTF, or WordPerfect document file format.
4. Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
5. Tables and figures are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end.
6. The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines
    
7. Authors’ names and affiliations do not appear anywhere on the manuscript for ensure scientific integrity
8. Copyright form has been provided with the manuscript
    
9. A Cover Letter has been provided with the manuscript (Please see Author Guidelines for preparation of cover letter)
10. A Title page has been provided with the manuscript
11. Ethics Comittee Permission Letter has been provided with the manuscript
     
12. A valid ORCID ID number must be provided for all authors.
13. Author(s) Contribution Form has been provided with the manuscript. 
14. AI Usage Declaration Form has been provided with the manuscript.

ORCID ID: All authors must provide a valid ORCID number during application process. If author(s) have a valid ORCID number, they are required to enter into "Edit Profile, ORCID ID section". ORCID iDs can only be assigned by the ORCID Registry. You must conform to their standards for expressing ORCID iDs, and include the full URI.

--

TYPES OF SUBMISSIONS: 

Original Research/ Empirical Research
Case Study (including Assessment Study and Usability/Feasibility Study)

Systematic/Integrative Review Paper (including Meta-Analysis)

Method Paper (including Developmental Research)

Discussion Paper

Perspectives. They are brief, accessible pieces covering a wide variety of timely topics of relevance to technology-mediated learning and teaching. It includes proposals. Perspective articles are limited to 1000 to 1200 words and usually include one figure or table. There is a maximum of 5 references.

Letters to the Editor, up to 300 words and 3 references. JOLTIDA welcomes letters to the editor on items published in JOLTIDA in the preceding six months. Letters may address statistics, facts, research, or theories of the previously published articles in JOLTIDA; however, it should not include critiques of original research or personal attacks on an author rather than constructive criticism of the author’s ideas/study findings. Authors of the original article may be invited to provide thoughtful responses to one or more letters by Editor-in-Chief of JOLTIDA, Dr. Mehmet Akif Ocak.

Other Types of Submissions. JOLTIDA also welcomes submissions of narratives, reflections, viewpoints, commentaries, photo/graphic essays, and other forms of writing. Contact Editor-in-Chief of JOLTIDA, Dr. Mehmet Akif Ocak, at joltida.info@gmail.com  to discuss formats not discussed in these guidelines.

--

PUBLICATION FEE:

Please see Price Policy for further information. 

COPE Code of Conduct (2020).  Adapted from 

http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf

1. General duties and responsibilities of editors
1.1. Editors should be accountable for everything published in their journals
This means the editors should
1.2. strive to meet the needs of readers and authors;
1.3. strive to constantly improve their journal;
1.4. have processes in place to assure the quality of the material they publish;
1.5. champion freedom of expression;
1.6. maintain the integrity of the academic record;
1.7. preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards;
1.8. always be willing to publish corrections, clarifcations, retractions and apologies when needed.

2. Relations with readers
2.1. Readers should be informed about who has funded research or other scholarly work and whether the funders had any role in the research and its publication and, if so, what this was.

3. Relations with authors
3.1. Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the remit of the journal.
3.2. Editors should not reverse decisions to accept submissions unless serious problems are identifed with the submission.
3.3. New editors should not overturn decisions to publish submissions made by the previous editor unless serious problems are identifed.
3.4. A description of peer review processes should be published, and editors should be ready to justify any important deviation from the described processes.
3.5. Journals should have a declared mechanism for authors to appeal against editorial decisions.
3.6. Editors should publish guidance to authors on everything that is expected of them. This guidance should be regularly updated and should refer or link to this code.
3.7. Editors should provide guidance about criteria for authorship and/or who should be listed as a contributor following the standards within the relevant feld.

4. Relations with editors
4.1. Editors should provide guidance to reviewers on everything that is expected of them including the need to handle submitted material in confdence. This guidance should be regularly updated and should refer or link to this code.
4.2. Editors should require reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission.
4.3. Editors should have systems to ensure that peer reviewers’ identities are protected unless they use an open review system that is declared to authors and reviewers.

5. Relations with editorial board members
5.1. Editors should provide new editorial board members with guidelines on everything that is expected of them and should keep existing members updated on new policies and developments.

6. Relations with journal owners and publishers
6.1. The relationship of editors to publishers and owners is often complex but should be based frmly on the principle of editorial independence.
6.2. Editors should make decisions on which articles to publish based on quality and suitability for the journal and without interference from the journal owner/publisher.om the journal owner/publisher.
6.3. Editors should have a written contract(s) setting out their relationship with the journal’s owner and/or publisher.
6.4. The terms of this contract should be in line with the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors.

7. Editorial and peer review processes
7.1. Editors should strive to ensure that peer review at their journal is fair, unbiased and timely.
7.2. Editors should have systems to ensure that material submitted to their journal remains confdential while under review.

8. Editorial and peer review processes
8.1. Editors should take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of the material they publish, recognising that journals and sections within journals will have different aims and standards.

9. Protecting individual data
9.1. Editors must obey laws on confdentiality in their own jurisdiction. Regardless of local statutes, however, they should always protect the confdentiality of individual information obtained in the course of research or professional interactions (e.g. between doctors and patients). It is therefore almost always necessary to obtain written informed consent for publication from people who might recognise themselves or be identifed by others (e.g. from case reports or photographs). It may be possible to publish individual information without explicit consent if public interest considerations outweigh possible harms, it is impossible to obtain consent and a reasonable individual would be unlikely to object to publication.

10. Encouraging ethical research (e.g. research involving humans or animals)
10.1. Editors should endeavour to ensure that research they publish was carried out according to the relevant internationally accepted guidelines (e.g. the Declaration of Helsinki for clinical research, the AERA and BERA guidelines for educational research).
10.2. Editors should seek assurances that all research has been approved by an appropriate body (e.g. research ethics committee, institutional review board) where one exists. However, editors should recognise that such approval does not guarantee that the research is ethical.

11. Dealing with possible misconduct
11.1. Editors have a duty to act if they suspect misconduct or if an allegation of misconduct is brought to them. This duty extends to both published and unpublished papers.
11.2. Editors should not simply reject papers that raise concerns about possible misconduct. They are ethically obliged to pursue alleged cases.
11.3. Editors should follow the COPE flowcharts13 where applicable.
11.4. Editors should frst seek a response from those suspected of misconduct. If they are not satisfed with the response, they should ask the relevant employers, or institution, or some appropriate body (perhaps a regulatory body or national research integrity organization) to investigate.
11.5. Editors should make all reasonable efforts to ensure that a proper investigation into alleged misconduct is conducted; if this does not happen, editors should make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem. This is an onerous but important duty.

12. Ensuring the integrity of the academic record
12.1. Errors, inaccurate or misleading statements must be corrected promptly and with due prominence.
12.2. Editors should follow the COPE guidelines on retractions

13. Intellectual property
Editors should be alert to intellectual property issues and work with their publisher to handle potential breaches of intellectual property laws and conventions.

14. Encouraging debate
14.1. Editors should encourage and be willing to consider cogent criticisms of work published in their journal.
14.2. Authors of criticised material should be given the opportunity to respond.
14.3. Studies reporting negative results should not be excluded.

15. Complaints
15.1. Editors should respond promptly to complaints and should ensure there is a way for dissatisfed complainants to take complaints further. This mechanism should be made clear in the journal and should include information on how to refer unresolved matters to COPE.
15.2. Editors should follow the procedure set out in the COPE flowchart on complaints

16. Commercial considerations
16.1. Journals should have policies and systems in place to ensure that commercial considerations do not affect editorial decisions (e.g. advertising departments should operate independently from editorial departments).
16.2. Editors should have declared policies on advertising in relation to the content of the journal and on processes for publishing sponsored supplements.
16.3. Reprints should be published as they appear in the journal unless a correction needs to be included in which case it should be clearly identifed.

17. Conflicts of interest
17.1. Editors should have systems for managing their own conflicts of interest as well as those of their staff, authors, reviewers and editorial board members.
17.2. Journals should have a declared process for handling submissions from the editors, employees or members of the editorial board to ensure unbiased review.

References/further reading
1. MIAME (Minimum information about a microarray experiment): https://www.fged.org/projects/miame
2. CONSORT statement (and other reporting guidelines) can be found at: www. equator-network.org
3. BMJ transparency policy: http://resources.bmj.com/bmj/authors/editorial-policies/transparency-policy
4. Marušić, A., Bates, T., Anić, A., & Marušić, M. (2006). How the structure of contribution disclosure statements affects validity of authorship: a randomized study in a general medical journal. Current medical research and opinion, 22(6), 1035-1044.
5. ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/
6. Kleinert, S., & Wager, E. (2010, July). Responsible research publication: international standards for editors. In A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore (pp. 317-28).
7. World Association of Medical Editors statement on the relationship between journal editors-in-chief and owners: https://www.wame.org/policies
8. World Medical Association: https://www.wma.net/policy/
9. American Educational Research Association ethical standards: https://www.aera.net/About-AERA/AERA-Rules-Policies
10. American Psychological Association ethical principles: https://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index
11. British Educational Research Association ethical guidelines: https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2018
12. Good Clinical Practice: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/ich-e6-r2-good-clinical-practice-scientific-guideline
13. COPE flowcharts: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts
14. COPE retraction guidelines: https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelines
15. De Angelis, C., Drazen, J. M., Frizelle, F. A., Haug, C., Hoey, J., Horton, R., ... & Van Der Weyden, M. B. (2004). Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. The Lancet, 364(9438), 911-912.
16. PubMed Central: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/

17. Declaration of Helsinki: https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/

COPE Code of Conduct(2020). Adapted from COPE

---

Ethical Research Involving Children

The ethical rules to be followed when conducting research with children have been determined to ensure the safety of children and to preserve the validity and reliability of the research. These rules ensure that researchers respect children's rights and do not harm them. Here are the basic ethical rules to consider when doing research with children:

1. Obtaining Consent
Informed Consent: Children who will participate in the research and their parents or legal guardians must be informed about the purpose, method, duration, possible risks and benefits of the research. A voluntary consent must be given based on this information.
Consent of Children: Consent must be obtained from children in accordance with their age and development level. This ensures that children understand that their participation is voluntary and that they can withdraw from the study at any time.
2. Confidentiality and Privacy
Data Security: The privacy and security of children's data must be protected. It is important that data is anonymized and personal information is not disclosed.
Protection of Privacy: During research, children's privacy should be respected and situations that would disturb or embarrass them should be avoided.
3. Harm Avoidance
Physical and Psychological Safety: Ensure that the research does not pose any risk of physical, psychological or emotional harm to children.
Sensitive Situations: Increased care should be taken in research with children who are particularly vulnerable (e.g., traumatized children, children with illnesses).
4. Justice and Equality
Fair Participation: The selection of research participants should be fair and no child should be discriminated against.
Balance: The benefits of children's participation in research should be balanced with the possible burdens and risks of participation.
5. Well-Being of Children
Participant Welfare: Children's physical and emotional well-being should always be prioritized, and their safety should be ensured throughout the research.
Providing Support: A system should be created where children can receive support in case of any negative effects during or after the research.
6. Professional Conduct and Responsibility
Competence: Those conducting the research must have the necessary knowledge and skills to work with children.
Honesty and Transparency: Be honest and transparent throughout the research process, and receive ethical guidance in case of possible conflict.
7. Cultural Sensitivity
Cultural Differences: Children's cultural, religious and social contexts should be sensitive and these contexts should be respected.
8. Sharing the Results
Information: Research results should be shared appropriately and in a language that children and their families can understand.
Contribution to Society: It should be ensured that research results are used for the benefit of society and especially the children and their families participating in the research.

JOLTIDA is committed to undertaking and supporting high quality ethical research that is respectful of children's human dignity, rights and wellbeing. The following seven commitments guide JOLTIDA'S work in ethical concerns regarding (Graham,  Powell, & Taylor, 2015):

1. Ethics in research involving children is everyone's responsibility
2. Respecting the dignity of children is core to ethical research
3. Research involving children must be just and equitable
4. Ethical research benefits children
5. Children should never be harmed by their participation in research
6. Research must always obtain children's informed and ongoing consent
7. Ethical research requires ongoing reflection

Compliance with these ethical rules when conducting research with children will both improve the quality of the research and protect the rights and welfare of children. These rules have been determined in accordance with international ethical standards and guidelines.

Further readings

Behrman, R. E., & Field, M. J. (Eds.). (2004). Ethical conduct of clinical research involving children. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK25557/

Everson-Bates, S. (1988). Research involving children: Ethical concerns and dilemmas. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 2(5), 234-239.
Graham, A., Powell, M. A., & Taylor, N. (2015). Ethical research involving children: Putting the evidence into practice. Family Matters, 96, 23-28.

Graham, A., Powell, M. A., & Taylor, N. (2015). Ethical research involving children: Encouraging reflexive engagement in research with children and young people. Children & Society, 29(5), 331-343.
https://childethics.com/

https://www.aera.net/Portals/38/docs/About_AERA/CodeOfEthics%281%29.pdf

https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/2417347

Helseth, S., & Slettebø, Å. (2004). Research involving children: some ethical issues. Nursing ethics, 11(3), 298-299.

JOURNAL OF LEARNING AND TEACHING IN THE DIGITAL AGE (JOLTIDA) PUBLICATION FEES AND INCENTIVE POLICY The Journal of Learning and Teaching in the Digital Age (JOLTIDA), in order to maintain its publication quality in accordance with international standards (WoS-ESCI) and to manage the heavy editorial and peer-review workload more effectively in the face of increasing submission volume, has implemented the following two-stage fee and incentive policy. The primary aim of JOLTIDA is not to generate commercial profit, but to ensure the sustainability of its academic quality and integrity. The fees collected are used to cover editorial pre-evaluation, peer-review process management, production and publication preparation, and journal administrative expenses. This policy is designed to be completely independent of the scientific acceptance/rejection decision, in full compliance with the Interuniversity Council Presidency's (ÜAK-Türkiye) decision dated December 14, 2021, regarding Predatory/Suspicious Journals. TWO-STAGE PROCESS JOLTIDA follows a transparent evaluation schedule in accordance with publication ethics principles: STAGE 1: Submission Fee After the article is uploaded to the journal system and undergoes an editorial review (scope and format approval - desk review), payment of this fee is mandatory to initiate the independent peer-review process. Fees are determined regionally according to the corresponding author's institutional address: *For Authors with Turkish Addresses: 5,500.00 TRY *For Authors with North and South American Addresses: 100.00 USD *For Authors with European and All Other Addresses (Rest of the World): 100.00 EUR The Submission Fee does not guarantee acceptance. It is charged solely to support the editorial pre-evaluation, peer-review management, and administrative infrastructure. STAGE 2: Publication Fee: No fee is charged at this stage. If the article is accepted for publication after passing through the independent peer-review processes; No additional Article Processing Charge (APC) or Editorial Processing Charge (EPC) is requested from the author(s). The fee collected at the submission stage covers all publication preparation processes. Refund Policy in Case of Article Rejection: The article submission fee does not guarantee acceptance for publication. The Article Submission Fee is strictly non-refundable under any circumstances, regardless of the final editorial decision (whether the manuscript is rejected during the preliminary desk review or following the independent peer-review process). This fee is allocated to cover the immediate administrative, technical, and operational costs incurred during the initial screening and review coordination. However, to support our authors and encourage ongoing academic collaboration, JOLTIDA offers a Resubmission Incentive: *If a manuscript is rejected, the corresponding author is automatically granted a 50% discount credit on the submission fee for their next new manuscript submitted to JOLTIDA. INCENTIVE AND EXEMPTION POLICY To support academic merit and contribute to our JOLTIDA stakeholders, the following exemptions and discounts are applied. Incentive requests must be reported with evidence (Web of Science or Scopus screenshots) in the Cover Letter during article submission: 1. High Impact Profile Authors: If at least one of the following criteria is met, the Publication Editor may decide to offer a discount of up to 50% on article submission fees or a discounted fast-track service: •h-index ≥ 15 (Web of Science or Scopus) OR •Total citation count ≥ 500 (Web of Science or Scopus) OR •Having published at least 5 articles in Q1–Q2 class journals in the last 5 years. 2. Editorial Board and Reviewer Contribution: •Editorial Board Exemption: Scientific studies in which JOLTIDA Editorial Board members are authors or co-authors are completely exempt from article submission fees. •Reviewer Discount: Reviewers who have submitted at least 2 qualified and timely completed reviewer reports for our journal in the last calendar year will receive a 50% discount on their first new submission where they are the corresponding author. 3. Loyalty Discount: Corresponding authors who have published at least one article in JOLTIDA in the last two calendar years will receive a 25% loyalty discount on new research articles they upload to the system. PRIORITY EVALUATION (FAST-TRACK) If authors request it with justifiable reasons (academic appointment, project closure, etc.), a priority evaluation option may be offered for their articles: •Scope: The editorial pre-evaluation and reviewer assignment process will be prioritized. The target timeframe for the initial peer review is 14–21 days. •Fees: In addition to the standard submission fee for fast-track, an additional priority review fee will be applied, determined by the publication editor and potentially up to twice the Article Submission Fee. Important Note: Fast-track is absolutely not a guarantee of acceptance; the number of reviewers, the qualifications of reviewers, and blind peer review standards are applied with the same rigor. COMBINING AND PRIORITIZING DISCOUNTS Discounts in different categories (High impact, reviewer contribution, loyalty, etc.) cannot be combined. If multiple discount conditions apply to the same submission, only one discount model with the most advantageous conditions will be applied to the author. All discount, exemption, and special review requests are ultimately subject to approval by the Publication Editor. EDITORIAL AUTHORITY, VERIFICATION, AND VIOLATIONS All reported metrics, citations, and peer review evidence are formally verified only through the Web of Science and Scopus databases. If misleading, incomplete, or falsified statements are detected, the author's incentive/discount requests will be canceled, and the article will be directly removed from the process. The author will then face sanctions in accordance with the journal's policies.