Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of original research must provide a clear and accurate account of their work and results, accompanied by an objective discussion of the significance of the study. The manuscript should include sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the study. Editorials, such as opinions or perspectives, must be explicitly labeled as such, while review articles should strive to be comprehensive, accurate, and unbiased. Authors must avoid false or deliberately misleading statements, as these are unethical and unacceptable.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to submit the raw data from their study for editorial review and should be willing to make the data publicly available whenever possible. Separately, authors are expected to retain such data and make it available to other qualified researchers for at least five years after publication. This may be facilitated by institutional or subject-specific data repositories or other appropriate data centers, provided that participant confidentiality and legal rights to proprietary data are respected.

Originality and plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their submissions are entirely original and that any ideas, words, or content borrowed from others are appropriately cited. All sources that have significantly influenced the research must be acknowledged. Plagiarism can take many forms, including presenting someone else's work as one's own, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of someone else's work without proper citation, or claiming results derived from someone else's research. Any form of plagiarism is unethical and unacceptable in scientific publishing and must be strictly avoided.

Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or simultaneous submission/publication

Publishing the same study in more than one journal or primary publication is strongly discouraged. Authors must not submit an article that has already been published elsewhere for consideration in another journal. Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals is unethical and constitutes inappropriate publishing behavior.

Authorship of the manuscript

Only individuals who meet the following criteria for authorship should be listed as authors, as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made substantial contributions to the conception, design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation of the study; (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.

Individuals who have made significant contributions to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section, provided they have given written permission to be named. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all appropriate contributors are listed as co-authors, that no inappropriate contributors are listed, and that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript and its submission.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Any conflicts of interest that could potentially influence the results or their interpretation must be disclosed as early as possible. This includes financial conflicts, such as honoraria, grants, funding, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, equity interests, paid expert testimony, or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial conflicts, such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, or beliefs related to the subject matter. All sources of funding for the project should also be disclosed.

Acknowledgement of sources

Authors must ensure proper acknowledgment of the contributions of others and cite all publications that have influenced the study. Privately obtained information should not be used or disclosed without the explicit written consent of the source. In addition, authors must not use confidential information obtained during the review of manuscripts or grant applications without the explicit written permission of the original author(s).

Hazards and human or animal subjects

Authors must identify any chemicals, procedures, or equipment with inherent hazards described in the manuscript. For studies involving human or animal subjects, authors must ensure that all procedures comply with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and have been approved by the appropriate institutional committee(s). A statement confirming such approval should be included in the manuscript. For studies involving human participants, authors must include a statement that informed consent has been obtained. The privacy and rights of human participants should always be protected.

Peer review

Authors are expected to participate actively in the peer review process and to cooperate fully with the editors by promptly providing raw data, clarifications, verification of ethics approvals, patient consent, and copyright permissions when requested. If a decision is made that the manuscript requires revision, authors must address the reviewers' comments systematically and thoroughly, responding to them point by point. Revised manuscripts should be updated accordingly and resubmitted within the specified deadline.

Fundamental errors in published works

It is the author's responsibility to contact the journal's editors or publisher as soon as they uncover substantial errors or inaccuracies in their own published work and to work with them to either rectify the manuscript in the form of an erratum or retract the paper. If a third party informs the editors or publisher that a published work has a serious error or inaccuracy, the authors must promptly fix or retract the publication, or give evidence to the journal editors that the paper is correct. Please see https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/jphcfum/page/13150 for rules on retracting or revising publications.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers play a critical role in the editorial process by providing informed assessments that help editors make decisions regarding manuscript publication. Their feedback also supports authors in improving their work through constructive and professional critiques. Peer review is an essential component of scholarly communication and the advancement of scientific research.

Promptness
Reviewers who feel unqualified to assess the research in a submission or are unable to provide a timely review should promptly inform the editors and decline the invitation. This ensures that alternative reviewers can be engaged without unnecessary delays.

Confidentiality
Manuscripts submitted for peer review are confidential documents and must be treated accordingly. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or disclose any part of the manuscript to others without explicit permission from the Editor-in-Chief. This confidentiality requirement also applies to invited reviewers who decline the review request.

Standards of objectivity
Reviews must be conducted with objectivity and fairness. Feedback should be constructive, with observations and reasoning clearly explained to help authors improve their work. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate and should be avoided.

Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work not cited by the authors. Any observation, derivation, or argument in the manuscript that has been previously published should be properly referenced. In addition, reviewers must inform the editors of any significant similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and other work of which they are aware.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Invited reviewers who have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions involved in the manuscript should inform the editors immediately and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be assigned.

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript may not be used by a reviewer for his/her own research without the explicit written permission of the authors. Confidential information or ideas obtained during the peer review process must remain confidential and must not be used for personal gain. These confidentiality obligations also apply to invited reviewers who decline to review.

Duties of Editors

Editorial independence
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts solely based on their academic merit, including significance, originality, validity, and clarity, as well as their relevance to the scope of the journal. This evaluation is made without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious beliefs, political views, or institutional affiliations. Editorial decisions are not influenced by government policy or the policy of any external organization. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the editorial content and publication schedule of the journal.

Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Editors and editorial board members may not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their research without the explicit written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through the handling of a manuscript must remain confidential and must not be used for personal gain. Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest, whether competitive, collaborative, or personal, with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the submission. In such cases, the manuscript should be reassigned to another qualified member of the editorial board.

Publication decisions
The Editors will ensure that all submissions considered for publication are peer-reviewed by at least two qualified experts in the relevant field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which manuscripts to publish, based on the validity of the work, its importance to researchers and readers, feedback from reviewers, and compliance with legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may consult with other editors or reviewers to make informed decisions about publication.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

When ethical issues about a submitted manuscript or published publication are highlighted, editors will take appropriate action. Even if it is discovered years after publication, every reported act of unethical publishing behavior will be investigated. If an ethical concern is discovered, the journal will publish a correction, retraction, statement of concern, or another relevant remark.

Duties of the Publisher

Dealing with unethical publishing behaviorIn cases of suspected or confirmed scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in conjunction with the editors, will take all necessary steps to address and resolve the issue. This may include the publication of a correction, clarification, or, in serious cases, retraction of the article in question. The publisher and editors are committed to identifying and preventing the publication of research involving misconduct and will not encourage or knowingly permit such behavior.

Access to journal content
The publisher is committed to the long-term preservation and accessibility of scholarly research. This will be achieved by working with relevant organizations and by maintaining a secure digital archive.