OUR BASIC ETHICS AND PUBLICATION PRINCIPLES
Transparency: The journal management ensures that publication processes and policies are open, clear, and accessible to all stakeholders.
Equal Opportunity: All submissions will be evaluated solely on the basis of scientific content and merit, regardless of the author's identity.
Justice and Objectivity: Decision-makers must remain impartial throughout the entire process and prioritize scientific criteria above all personal opinions.
Academic Integrity: A firm stance is taken against unethical scientific behavior such as plagiarism, falsification, and data manipulation.
Prevention of Conflict of Interest: Parties involved in the process declare any potential conflicts of interest to ensure the impartiality of the evaluation process.
Principle of Confidentiality: In accordance with the stated ethical principles and policies, articles and related information are kept confidential.
Double-Blind Peer Review: To maintain scientific quality and impartiality, the identities of both the author and the reviewer are mutually concealed throughout the process.
Accountability: Responsibility for the scientific accuracy of published content is ensured, and correction or retraction processes are implemented when necessary.
Intellectual Property Rights: This involves protecting authors' rights under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license, ensuring legal representation of their work, and granting the journal only the right of first publication while retaining authors' copyrights.
Commitment to Publication Ethics: Processes are strictly adhered to by COPE and other international scientific publishing standards.
Scientific Originality: Only original works that contribute to the literature and have not been previously published elsewhere are accepted.
Protection of Author Rights: Author rights are protected at every stage of the process in accordance with relevant ethical principles and policies.
Communication in Accordance with Human Values: Authors receive prompt, courteous, and constructive feedback throughout all evaluation processes, protecting their academic work and motivation.
Archiving and Accessibility: This involves ensuring that published works are continuously accessible and preserved for the benefit of society through an open access policy.
Professionalism and Development: This refers to the journal's adaptation to the outside world and innovations on an academic basis with an open system approach; and its continuous updating of processes in line with stakeholder feedback to improve scientific publishing standards.
ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
EDITORS' RESPONSIBILITIES
1. Publication and Responsibility Decision: The editor-in-chief and field editors of the Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies are responsible for deciding which submitted articles comply with the journal's aims and publication policies and should be published. Editors are also responsible for determining which submitted articles comply with legal requirements regarding defamatory publication, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor is responsible for the content and publication quality of the journal and has the right to consult with the editorial board and reviewers when making publication decisions. The editor must ensure a fair and equitable peer review and evaluation process. The editor of the Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies should strive to meet the needs of readers and authors.
2. Conflict of Interest: Editors should not evaluate works in which there is a conflict of interest arising from competition, collaboration, or other relationships or connections between them and the author. Editors should not have conflicts of interest with other parties such as authors, funders, reviewers, etc.
3. Impartiality: Articles submitted to the Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies must always be evaluated according to completely open, transparent, scientific, and objective criteria, without any prejudice. Texts should be evaluated solely on the basis of their intellectual and scientific merit, without regard to the authors' race, color, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political views.
4. Confidentiality: The editor-in-chief, assistant editors, field editors, and editorial board must not disclose information regarding submitted manuscripts to anyone except the author(s), reviewers, publisher, and indexers in relation to their review process requests. No information regarding a submitted manuscript should be disclosed by the editor to anyone other than the editorial board, reviewers, and the journal owner. However, in the event of suspicion of an ethical violation in the manuscript or the initiation of a legal/judicial process, the editorial board reserves the right, while maintaining confidentiality, to share necessary information and documents with relevant ethics committees, the author's affiliated institutions, or competent judicial authorities.
5. Editors are obligated to carefully examine complaints from authors, reviewers, or readers and to respond in an informative and explanatory manner.
6. The journal owner, publisher, and no other political or commercial entities shall influence the editors' independent decision-making.
7. Other ethical principles that editors must adhere to include:
· Articles that do not meet ethical principles and scientific criteria will be returned. Other articles will be sent to a reviewer or reviewers who can provide a better assessment.
· When stating the reasons for rejection (e.g., irrelevance to the journal's subject matter, inappropriate writing, content, or layout, presence of significant errors, etc.), appropriate and non-offensive language should be used.
· Research data and author's data must be protected. Confidentiality regarding submitted articles is carefully maintained. Confidentiality principles must continue even after rejection or publication.
· The evaluation process will not be delayed due to negligence or intentionally. Blocking an article or delaying its publication is unethical.
· Whether the study was conducted in accordance with ethical guidelines is considered.
· The study will be evaluated impartially and independently, without prejudice (free from influences such as race, religion, nationality, gender, ideology and orientation, and institutional/personal affiliation).
· Articles are not sent to reviewers who may have (or could have) a conflict of interest in the subject matter. Reviewers are selected impartially.
· If similarities are found in one's own work, the evaluation is left to the assistant editor or field editors.
· Regarding this study, no information will be exchanged with anyone other than the editorial board members, reviewers, and author(s).
· Information from this article may not be used in the work of the editor or any of their relatives.
· Scientific criteria are strictly adhered to in the selection of referees; only referees with expertise in the subject matter are chosen.
· The reviewers' opinions and suggestions should be communicated to the author by the editor without revealing their names.
· Authors should not be given false information at any stage of the review process.
· The referee reports must not be altered in any way, and no reports that are contrary to the truth should be prepared.
· Editors or field editors should not use the work in their own research before it is published; nor should they allow others to use it.
· The individuals and organizations providing financial support to the magazine are clearly stated.
· Articles rejected by the referees are returned; nothing should be kept except copies of the correspondence (referee reports are kept for at least 5 years).
· The journal corrects any scientifically unethical studies that have been published inadvertently through publication (revision/retraction).
8. The editors on the "Editorial Board" are responsible for : managing policy changes of the journal; ensuring the suitability of articles for the journal and issue; working with the editor-in-chief on scientific and ethical issues such as plagiarism, conflicts of interest, and author changes; reviewing articles at the editor-in-chief's appointment to resolve ethical and scientific problems; contributing to the academic, ethical, and scientific functioning of the journal and supporting the editor in these matters.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF REFEREES
1. Maintaining the Process Flow: A reviewer who finds the assigned work irrelevant to their field, feels inadequate to critique it, or is unable to submit a critique in a timely manner should inform the editor and withdraw from the review.
2. Confidentiality: Submitted manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents and should not be shown or discussed with anyone other than those authorized by the editor. Privileged information and insights gained during the peer review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
3. Impartiality: Peer reviews should be objective, fair, and in accordance with scientific ethics. No personal criticism should be directed at the author. Reviewers should evaluate works regardless of the authors' origin, gender, sexual orientation, or political philosophy. Reviewers should also ensure a fair blind peer review process for evaluating submitted texts. Reviewers should express their opinions with clearly supported arguments.
4. Disclosure of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published works not mentioned by the author. A reviewer should also bring to the editor's attention any substantial similarities or overlaps between the work under review and any other previously published work to their knowledge.
5. Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should not evaluate works in which there is a conflict of interest arising from competition, collaboration, or other relationships or connections between themselves and the author. Reviewers should not have a conflict of interest with parties such as authors, funders, editors, etc.
6. Support to the Editor: Reviewers should assist editors in the decision-making process and also help authors improve their texts.
7. Other ethical principles that referees must adhere to:
· Reviewers must evaluate the article within the given timeframe and without delay.
· The reviewer must work diligently and complete the reports on time. If the reviewer is unable to evaluate the submitted report due to the circumstances, they must return it immediately.
· The scientist acting as a referee is obligated to provide a "fair" critique.
· The study should be evaluated without prejudice (free from influences such as race, religion, nationality, gender, ideology and orientation, and institutional/personal affiliation), impartially, and independently.
· If the editor is unable or unwilling to evaluate the work due to reasons such as a mismatch of interests, lack of information on the subject matter, personal or professional affiliation, conflict/overlap of interest, or time constraints, the work should be returned to the editor or board chair as soon as possible.
· The reviewer is required to maintain confidentiality and not share any information about the article.
· The author should not exchange information about the work with anyone other than the editor or board chairman who submitted it.
· A reviewer should not send an article for which they have been asked for their opinion to another reviewer without consulting and obtaining approval from the editor.
· They are responsible for ensuring that the data related to the study is protected and stored in accordance with the rule of confidentiality.
· It should be considered whether the study was conducted in accordance with ethical guidelines.
· If there is another article that is very similar to and overlaps with the article under review, the editor should be informed.
· Publication of inconsistent and unethical articles should be prevented.
· Cartels cannot be formed in refereeing, and referees cannot criticize decisions that are not directly attributed to them.
· The shortcomings of the study should be pointed out in a "guiding" tone.
· The author should clearly and understandably express their opinions, assessments, and recommendations regarding the study in their report, and support them with literature data where necessary.
· The researcher should not use the study in their own research before it is published, nor should they allow others to use it.
· The reviewer must clearly report their recommendations for publication or non-publication. Writing down the reasons is an ethical responsibility. The reviewer should use appropriate language in their report.
· Criticisms of the article should be objective, balanced, and directed at the text itself, not the author.
· Reviewers should act with integrity and truthfulness when rejecting an article.
· The reviewer should evaluate the quality of the manuscript, the experimental and theoretical aspects of the work, its interpretation, and its presentation, adhering to scientific principles. They should also respect the author's intellectual independence.
· The reviewer should be sensitive to situations where the manuscript under review is related to their own research topic or a work in print, potentially creating a conflict of interest. If such a situation arises, they should immediately return the manuscript without reviewing it and inform the editor of any potential conflict or bias.
· If the article is the subject of the reviewer's research, and the authors and the reviewer are competing on that topic, the article should be returned without review, and the information should not be used.
· The reviewer should not accept reviews of works written by individuals with whom they have a personal or professional relationship, on the grounds that this may affect the objectivity of the critique.
· The referee should treat the document sent to him for critique as confidential.
· Reviewers should articulate and support their criticisms in a way that allows the editor and author to understand the points on which the criticisms are based.
· The reviewer should be alert to possible erroneous citations the author may make to similar works by other scholars.
· Reviewers should not use unpublished information, discussions, or comments from a manuscript under review without the author's permission. If a reviewer realizes that their evaluation is unhelpful, they should ethically discontinue the work.
· Careful consideration should be given to the language used, so as not to discourage or undermine the confidence of researchers at the beginning of their academic careers.
· The evaluation report should be read one last time by the reviewer, and care should be taken to ensure that it is an easily understandable text that includes suggestions for addressing shortcomings and is supported by the necessary sources for the criticisms.
AUTHORS' RESPONSIBILITIES
1. Reporting Standards: A study submitted to the Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies must be prepared and submitted in accordance with academic rules, ethical principles, and specifically the framework requested by the journal.
2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must write entirely original works and, if they use the work and/or words of others, they must cite them appropriately. By submitting their articles to the Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies, authors guarantee that their articles are original and comply with ethical standards, that the sources used are fully cited, and that they do not resemble other articles that have been published or are in the publication stage. In this context, authors must upload a document to the Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies DergiPark system showing that their work has a plagiarism detection rate of no more than 20%, including the bibliography, after having their work tested by plagiarism detection software (ithenticate, turnitin, StrikePlagiarism).
3. Publication in Multiple Places: In general, an author should not publish the same research text in multiple articles. Submitting the same study text to multiple journals simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable.
4. Citation of Sources: The citation of sources taken from the work of others should always be done properly. Authors are required to cite previous publications that influenced the substance of their reported work.
5. Authorship of the Study: Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a meaningful contribution to the concept, design, implementation, or interpretation of the reported study. All contributors who have made significant contributions should be listed following the first author. If there are individuals involved in the research project in various ways, they should be declared or listed as contributors. Authorship should also include a corresponding author who is in contact with the journal editor. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors are included in the article.
6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: All authors are required to disclose any financial sources or conflicts of interest that may influence the conclusions or interpretations of their work.
7. Copyright and Other Ethical Statements: The Copyright Agreement and Ethical Statements File contains the Copyright Agreement, Ethical Statement, Note, Support and Acknowledgments, Artificial Intelligence and Types Usage Statement, Data Sharing Statement, Conflict of Interest Statement, Financial Support Statement, Contribution Rate Statement, and Document Verification. Authors are obligated to complete these statements and verifications. The author is responsible for the information provided in these statements.
8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If an author notices a significant error or flaw in their published work, it is their responsibility to immediately report it to the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to correct the error or flaw. Since the Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies is published through the DergiPark system, such change requests must be submitted within 5 days of the journal's publication date. Authors have an obligation to work with the editor to ensure that errors are corrected.
PUBLICATION POLICY -TRANSPARENT PUBLISHING POLICY-
GENERAL PUBLICATION POLICY
1. Articles submitted to the Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies must be original papers that fill a gap in the field, or research that evaluates previously published works and presents new and noteworthy perspectives on the subject. The Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies publishes both theoretical and applied research.
2. For articles to be published in the Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies, they must not have been previously published elsewhere or accepted for publication. Papers previously presented at a scientific conference may be accepted for the review process provided this is clearly stated.
3. Every author named in the article is responsible for the content of the work.
4. Reviewers maintain the confidentiality of the review process and do not share it with third parties. Every work submitted to the journal is subject to impartial review by the reviewers.
5. Editors and subject editors maintain an impartial stance toward every work submitted to the journal and deemed suitable for publication, without regard to religion, language, race, nationality, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation.
6. In the event of an allegation that a manuscript submitted to the journal constitutes plagiarism, is in the process of being published elsewhere, or has already been published, the journal editor and subject editors will investigate the matter. If the allegation is confirmed, the editor reserves the right not to publish the manuscript.
7. All authors submitting articles to the Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies are deemed to have accepted all responsibilities outlined in the journal’s Statement of Publication Ethics.
8. The Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies accepts articles in Turkish, Kyrgyz, English, and Russian. For articles in Kyrgyz and Russian (Cyrillic alphabet), the author’s name and affiliation, article title, abstract, and references must also be written in the Latin alphabet.
9. During the initial submission, the peer review process will not be initiated for articles that do not comply with the journal’s formatting guidelines.
10. Authors should periodically log into the DerkiPark system to check the status of their submission and review the feedback from reviewers and editors. Since authors can view the revisions requested by reviewers through the system, they must make the necessary corrections and upload the final version of the article back to the system.
OPEN ACCESS, COPYRIGHT AND LICENSE POLICY
Copyright: The copyright of the works published within the Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies belongs to the authors. While authors transfer the first publication rights of their works to the journal, they retain the intellectual property rights of the work.
Licensing and Terms: All articles published in this journal are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license. Under this license:
Sharing: You may copy and redistribute the work in any medium or format.
Citation (BY): You must cite the original work in accordance with the Citation Rules, provide a link to the license, and indicate if any changes have been made.
Non-Commercial (NC): You may not use this material for commercial purposes (e.g., sales, advertising revenue).
Archiving (Self-Archiving): Authors may share the publisher version (PDF) of their articles without restriction in institutional archives or on personal websites, provided they cite the original source and license.
Copyright Agreement: In the Copyright Agreement and Ethical Statements file with the authors, a declaration regarding the open access type and publication license is obtained with a wet signature or e-signature.
DATA ACCESSIBILITY STATEMENT AND POLICY
The Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies adheres to the principles of scientific integrity and verifiability. However, in order to protect the intellectual property rights of raw data and prevent potential misuse, the following policy is implemented:
Data Retention Obligation: Authors are obligated to securely store the raw data underlying their published works for at least 5 (five) years from the date of publication.
Sharing Upon Request: Data submitted to the journal will not be uploaded to third-party data repositories. However, if a reasonable justification is provided to verify the accuracy of the study's findings, the relevant data may be requested under the supervision of the editorial board or the peer review committee.
Limitations of Use: The requested data may only be used to verify the results in the article; it may not be derived or processed for any other scientific study or commercial purpose without the written permission of the author.
Copyright and Right of Disposition: The copyright of the published work and all data underlying the study belong exclusively to the author. Authors are not obligated to obtain permission from our journal to share, archive, or collaborate with third parties on their data; however, academic integrity dictates that the original publication be cited.
Social Sciences Data Note: When sharing requested data, the principle of anonymity must be adhered to. Raw recordings that could reveal the identities of participants (audio recordings, name lists, etc.) will not be shared under any circumstances; only the anonymized data set that forms the basis of scientific analysis will be provided.
Data Sharing Statement: A statement regarding data sharing is obtained from authors via e-signature or wet signature in the Copyright Agreement and Ethical Statements file. This statement is published in the article.
ETHICS AUDIT AND ETHICS COMMITTEE APPROVAL POLICY
1. The ethical aspects of the article are reviewed by the editor and field editors. Articles that violate scientific ethical principles are returned to the author.
2. The following regulations are taken into consideration regarding scientific ethical rules and oversight:
a) Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
b) YÖK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Guidelines
c) Ethical Conduct Principles for Higher Education Institutions
d) TÜBİTAK - Research and Publication Ethics Board Regulation
3. Studies requiring Ethics Committee approval must upload the approved documents to the system. Studies that lack the necessary ethics committee approval, or that have the approval but fail to upload it to the system, will not be published.
4. The criteria stated in TR-Dizin regarding which types of scientific research require "Ethics Committee Approval" shall be taken into consideration:
-All types of research conducted using qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from participants through surveys, interviews, focus groups, observation, experiments, and discussion techniques require "Ethics Committee Approval".
-Articles should state whether ethical committee approval and/or legal/special permission is required. If such permission is necessary, the institution from which the permission was obtained, the date, and the decision or number must be clearly indicated.
-Ethics Committee Approval is required for research involving the use of humans and animals (including materials/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes.
-If the study involves the use of human or animal subjects, it must be stated that the study was conducted in accordance with international declarations, guidelines, etc.
-Clinical trials on humans and research on animals require "Ethics Committee Approval".
-According to the Personal Data Protection Law, retrospective studies require "Ethics Committee Approval".
-Permission must be obtained from the owners of scales, surveys, and photographs used by others, and this should be stated in the article.
-Case reports should state that an "Informed Consent Form" was obtained.
-It should be stated that copyright regulations have been complied with for the intellectual and artistic works used.
For source and detailed information, please click here.
PLAGIARISM POLICY
The similarity rate, including references, must not exceed 20%. Editors have the right to review similarity reports in detail and to evaluate and reject works as ethical violations-even if the similarity rate is low-if they do not comply with scientific citation methods or, despite compliance, fail to offer a new contribution because a significant portion of the work consists of citations. If the similarity rate exceeds the specified limit, the final authority to accept or reject the article-taking into account the preservation of the work’s originality, the terminological requirements of the field, and full compliance with scientific citation rules-rests with the Editor and the Editorial Board. The similarity report is automatically generated during the article submission process on Dergipark.
AUTHORSHIP AND CONTRIBUTION POLICIES
Authors are required to upload their articles or works by entering the requested information into the files titled “Copyright Agreement and Ethical Declarations” and “Title Page.” These files submitted by authors serve as declarations regarding the authors and their order of authorship. Our journal bases the order of authorship on the authors’ declarations of their contribution levels. The order of authorship should be based on the principle of prioritizing those who have contributed the most.
POLICY ON CHANGES TO AUTHOR ORDER AND ADDING AUTHORS
The “Title Page” and “Copyright Agreement and Ethical Statements” files submitted with the manuscript constitute a definitive declaration regarding the number and order of authors. As a general rule, adding authors or changing the order after submission is not accepted.
The sole exception to this rule for manuscripts currently under review is when the need for an additional expert becomes a scientific necessity due to reviewers’ requests for further analysis or methodology, or when the specific contribution ratios of the authors to the study are scientifically documented to have changed. In such exceptional cases, the written consent of all authors with wet signatures, a detailed statement outlining the scientific rationale for the change, and a new author form must be submitted to the Editorial Board. Requests are reviewed and decided upon by the Editorial Board; if the Board deems the rationale insufficient, the change is rejected.
No authors may be added, removed, or reordered in articles for which the peer review process has been completed, that have been accepted for publication, or that have already been published.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY
Definition of conflict of interest: a situation in which the ethical purpose of a scientific activity is compromised by a conflicting interest (financial, moral, personal, etc.), resulting in the loss of objectivity at any stage of the activity, the appearance of such a loss, or the potential for such a loss (ICMJE).
Our journal requires authors to complete a “conflict of interest statement” during the initial submission process. This statement is included in the “Copyright Agreement and Ethical Declarations” document. Additionally, our editors review this statement to verify its accuracy.
Regarding issues related to conflicts of interest, we carefully follow the recommendations of platforms such as COPE, ICMJE, TR-Dizin, and Dergipark. You may contact our journal via the email addresses listed on the contact page or through the “feedback” button on Dergipark regarding matters related to conflicts of interest.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND ITS TYPES USAGE POLICY
Our journal supports the use of artificial intelligence and its derivatives as long as it does not violate ethical principles. Authors are required to declare their use of artificial intelligence in accordance with the principle of transparency. This declaration is included in the Copyright Agreement and Ethical Statements file. Authors are responsible for the accuracy of the information declared. Our journal guarantees that it does not use artificial intelligence at any stage of the article review process and obtains a declaration from reviewers on this matter.
Ethically Accepted (Permitted) Uses
Language and Style Editing: Using AI tools to improve text fluency, correct grammatical errors, or clarify academic terminology.
Data Analysis Assistance: Utilizing AI to clean complex datasets or write basic statistical codes (However, the author is responsible for the methodology).
Literature Search Support: Finding relevant articles or summarizing a broad body of literature to identify key concepts.
Visual Optimization: Clarifying graphics or schematizing technical drawings (provided that image manipulation is not performed).
Unethical (Prohibited) Uses
Author Identification: Artificial intelligence can never be listed as an "author" or "co-author" in a paper. AI cannot assume responsibility for the work and has no legal personality.
Original Content Generation: Directly typing the core ideas of an article, such as the discussion, conclusion, or hypothesis, into the AI falls under the category of "plagiarism" or "forgery."
Fabrication: Using AI to produce non-existent experimental results or survey data is one of the most serious academic offenses.
Reference Fabrication: It is scientific misconduct when AI sometimes generates (hallucinations) sources that don't actually exist and uses them in articles.
This policy was developed using the TÜBİTAK Generative Artificial Intelligence Guide .
FINANCIAL SUPPORT POLICY
All submissions to our journal require authors to clearly declare any financial support received during the research, data collection, analysis, or writing phases (institutional funding, project support, grants, sponsorships, etc.). This declaration is included in the Copyright Agreement and Ethical Statements file. The full name of the supporting institution and, if applicable, the project/grant number must be included during the declaration. Authors are responsible for the accuracy of the information provided. If any hidden financial conflict of interest is identified, the journal's ethical violation procedures will be applied.
ARTICLE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION POLICY
Editor and Editorial Board Review: Articles are reviewed based on three elements: a) adherence to ethical principles, b) scientific content, and c) formatting. If all three elements are present, the article is sent to the editor or field editors for peer review.
If there are problems with these three elements: If the problem is:
(i) If it relates to item “ a ”, it will be rejected with the necessary reasons stated. (If there is a lack of documents, the author will be contacted. If the existing document has not been uploaded, it will be uploaded. If there are no documents at all, it will be rejected.)
(ii) If it relates to clauses “ b ” and “ c ” and concerns issues that can be corrected, the author is given at least 20 days to make the corrections;
(iii) If the issues related to items “ b ” and “ c ” are irreparable, the application will be rejected, stating the necessary reasons.
Section Editor Review: If the article passes the same checks and is deemed suitable, it is sent to a reviewer. Otherwise, revisions are requested. In cases of violations where revision is not possible, the article is rejected with the necessary reason stated.
Points considered during the preliminary examination:
Compliance with ethical principles : Has the article complied with the necessary ethical guidelines? Have the citation rules been followed? If the study requires ethical committee approval, has it been approved? Are there any conflicts of interest or other statements, and if so, are they appropriate?
Scientific content : First of all, is the topic relevant to the aims and scope of our journal? Have scientific methods been used? Does the article meet the criteria of scientific novelty, originality, and added value?
Formatting: This section considers compliance with article writing guidelines. For example, are author details submitted separately? Is the bibliography and citation style, writing style, tables, and graphs appropriate for the journal? Have all requested documents been uploaded? etc.
REFEREE EVALUATION PROCESS POLICY
1- Peer reviews of articles are conducted according to the ethical guidelines and using a double-blind peer review process. At least two reviewers are assigned to each article.
2- Referee recommendations are not taken into consideration.
3- The refereeing process and reviews are free of charge.
4. The author and any information that could identify them (author's name, title, affiliation, ORCID number, and email address) are not sent to the reviewer. To ensure this, no author information is included in the initial manuscript file when the article is first submitted, and this information is uploaded to the system separately in a file called "Author Information". This "Author Information" file, which is not sent to the reviewer, also contains elements that could identify the author: ethical statement, ethics committee approval, acknowledgments, notes, conflict of interest, etc. This information is added to the article text during the publication acceptance stage after the reviewer evaluations.
In addition, the article is meticulously reviewed by the field editors before being sent to the reviewer, considering that there may be other elements in the article text that could point to the author. If there is any information that could point to the author, it is removed or anonymized before being sent to the reviewer. In particular, the presence of a phrase such as "...as we stated in our previous study/article, …………….(XXX, 2022: p.25)." is checked in an article. If it is present, it is appropriately modified before being sent to the reviewer.
5- Reviewers evaluate submitted articles based on factors such as originality of the work, contribution to the literature, methodology, etc. Reviewers may decide to accept, reject, or require major or minor revisions to the article.
6- Based on the evaluation results from the referees (Acceptance, Rejection, Major and Minor Revision), the following actions are taken:
situations Referee decisions Action to be taken
Situation 1. Acceptance Acceptance Accepted
Situation 2. Rejection Rejection It will be rejected.
Situation 3. Rejection Major The manuscript may be rejected at the editor's discretion or sent to at least one more reviewer: If rejected, a rejection decision will be made. If a major revision is received, it may be rejected at the editor's discretion or a major revision may be given. If an acceptance or minor revision is received, a major revision will be given.
Situation 4. Acceptance Rejection The manuscript may be rejected at the editor's discretion or sent to at least one more reviewer: If rejected, a rejection decision will be made. If a major revision is received, it may be rejected at the editor's discretion or a major revision may be given. If an acceptance or minor revision is received, a major revision will be given.
Situation 5. Rejection Minor The manuscript may be rejected at the editor's discretion or sent to at least one more reviewer: If rejected, a rejection decision will be made. If a major revision is received, it may be rejected at the editor's discretion or a major revision may be given. If an acceptance or minor revision is received, a major revision will be given.
Situation 6. Acceptance Major It will be sent to at least one more reviewer. If a rejection or acceptance is received, it may be rejected or a major revision may be given at the editor's discretion. If a minor or acceptance is received, a major revision will be given.
Situation 7. Acceptance Minor A decision for minor revision is made.
Situation 8. Major Major The editor may decide to reject or make a major revision.
Situation 9. Major Minor The editor may decide to reject or make a major revision.
Situation 10. Minor Minor The editor may decide to make a major or minor revision.
Note: These principles apply only when all peer review is conducted in accordance with our ethical principles and policies. Inappropriate evaluations will be disregarded, and the review process will continue from where it left off. Editors may request minor corrections if they deem it necessary.
7- Referees and corrections from the author are reviewed by the editor at each stage.
8. Editors send articles to a third-party reviewer if they find the peer review process to be flawed (e.g., the article was reviewed too quickly, unnecessary sources were included, etc.).
9- Editors review the corrections submitted by the author and return unsuitable manuscripts to the author (due to failure to follow the reviewer's recommendations).
10- Referees are given 15 days to complete their evaluations.
11. Care is taken to ensure that the article author, reviewers, and the reviewers assigned to the article are from different institutions.
12- To avoid jeopardizing the double-blind peer review process, the names of the reviewers are not published in the journal issue.
13- Reviewer assignments are made through external reviews; reviewers are not assigned by the journal board (reviewers may be assigned by the editorial board in cases involving various ethical and scientific issues and when deemed necessary by the editor).
14- Recommendations from reviewers (reject, accept, major, minor) are sent to the author via the Dergipark system, without sending the reviewers' personal information.
15- After revision decisions, authors must upload a response file to the reviewer in addition to the article file.
16- Our journal guarantees that it does not use artificial intelligence at any stage of the article review process and obtains confirmation from the reviewers to this effect.
CRITERIA FOR ASSIGNING NUMBERS
Acceptance of an article for publication does not automatically mean it will be included in a subsequent issue. Assignment to an issue is decided by the Editorial Board. The Editorial Board's criteria for assignment are as follows:
Scientific Impact and Innovation: This is the most effective criterion. Studies that revolutionize their field, have high citation potential, or are methodologically very strong are assigned priority numbers.
Timeliness and Urgency: Time-sensitive topics (e.g., a new pandemic, a recent legal regulation, or rapidly developing technology) are included in the first issue without delay to ensure they don't become outdated.
Thematic Cohesion and Focus: Editors can group articles on similar topics together in the same issue, aiming for that issue to become a "reference source" in a specific field.
Balance Between Genre and Content: Research articles are assigned to a specific number while maintaining a balance between article types.
Author and Institutional Diversity: To maintain the journal's impartiality, care is taken to ensure that no single issue contains multiple studies from the same institution or by the same author.
Technical and Layout Constraints: Technical details such as page count limits or image placement may cause some articles to be postponed to the next issue.
Acceptance Date: When all aforementioned conditions are met, articles are assigned a numbering system in chronological order on a "first come, first served" basis.
ARCHIVE POLICY
Articles published in the Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies are digitally archived in LOCKSS, thanks to the privileges provided by the Dergipark platform. Our entire archive, including articles published since our acceptance into indexes such as Dergipark and the Russian Science Citation Index, TR-Dizin, and Ebsco, is available in Dergipark and the Russian Science Citation Index. An institutional offline archive is also maintained.
POLICY REGARDING POST-BROADCAST DISPUTES
Our journal uses the Dergipark platform for its publication activities. All processes are recorded within this platform. Post-publication issues can be addressed via the email addresses listed on the contact page and the Dergipark "feedback" button. COPE flowcharts are considered when addressing post-publication issues. For detailed information, please click here .
INDEXING POLICY
Our journal is registered and indexed in various databases and indexes primarily to ensure that authors' scientific work receives the recognition it deserves, to increase their national and international recognition, and to share their work with the scientific community through open access. We regularly upload articles to these databases.
CORRECTION POLICY
Editing: After articles are published on Dergipark, the system provides publishers with a 5-day editing period. This period is given to make changes or correct errors that do not involve ethical violations and do not require peer review. After the articles are published, Dergipark automatically sends an email to the authors. In addition to this email, our editorial team sends an informational message to all authors informing them to review their articles and giving them four days. On the last day, the requested changes are entered into the system and the necessary edits are made.
Correction: After the five-day period mentioned above, correction and retraction requests for articles are reviewed by our editorial team, and retractions and corrections are published if deemed necessary. Retraction and correction processes are carried out through the Dergipark system, and links to both versions of the relevant article are provided.
COPE guidelines are taken into consideration in this regard. Click here for detailed information .
RECALL POLICY
Article in process
The author has the right to retract the article while it is still in the new submission status.
If an article has minor reviews or at least one peer review, the author may request withdrawal with editor approval. If the editor does not respond to the request within 15 days, the article will be automatically withdrawn.
During the publication process, authors can only submit requests, and the 15-day condition will not apply. A withdrawal card has also been added to the editor panel. Withdrawal requests can be viewed from this card.
Click here for detailed information .
The article in the publication
A retraction of a published article may be published either by the author with a justification that complies with ethical frameworks, or by the editorial board's decision if the article is found to contain ethical violations.
EVALUATION OF COMPLAINTS AND OBJECTIONS
Our journal uses the Dergipark platform for its publication activities. All transactions in this context are recorded. Complaints and objections regarding the journal board or peer review are made via the email addresses specified on the contact page and through Dergipark's "feedback" button. The process of handling complaints and objections is managed by considering the COPE guidelines and practices in exemplary cases. The main element in complaints is the submission of evidence supporting the complaint or objection. Complaints supported by evidence are reviewed by our editorial team and the necessary action is taken. For more detailed information, please click here .
EVALUATION OF ALLEGATIONS OF RESEARCH MISREPRESENTATION
Our journal uses the Dergipark platform for its publication activities. All transactions in this context are recorded. Allegations of research misconduct are made via the email addresses specified on the contact page and through Dergipark's "feedback" button. The process for handling such cases is managed by considering the COPE guidelines and practices in exemplary cases. The main element in complaints is the submission of evidence supporting the alleged misconduct. These allegations, supported by evidence, are reviewed by our editorial team and the necessary action is taken. For more detailed information, please click here .
Various sections from the COPE Implementation Guide (Applied in our Journal)
The COPE flowchart headings applied in our journal on various topics are listed below. Click here to review the guide .
RESOURCES AND USEFUL LINKS
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): https://publicationethics.org/
COPE, Conflict of Interest Cases: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Case?classification=2774
COPE, Evaluation of Research Misconduct Allegations: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts?classification=2771
COPE, Evaluation of Complaints and Appeals: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts?classification=2773
COPE, Post-Publication Discussions, Revisions: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts?classification=2780
COPE, Conflict of Interest Cases https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Case?classification=2774
YÖK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive: https://www.yok.gov.tr/Sayfalar/Kurumsal/mevzuat/bilimsel-arastirma-ve-etik-yonetmeligi.aspx
Ethical Conduct Principles for Higher Education Institutions: https://bayek.manas.edu.kg/upload/2_2014.Y%C3%96K_Y%C3%BCksek%C3%B6%C4%9Fretim%20Kurumlar%C4%B1%20Etik%20Davran%C4%B1%C5%9F%20%C4%B0lkeleri.pdf
TÜBİTAK - Research and Publication Ethics Board Regulation: https://tubitak.gov.tr/sites/default/files/2024-05/277_islenmis_hali_1.pdf
TR-Dizin, studies requiring ethics committee approval: https://confluence.ulakbim.gov.tr/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97583694
Ulakbim, withdrawal procedures: https://confluence.ulakbim.gov.tr/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=187301946
ICMJE, Conflict of Interest: https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/author-responsibilities--conflicts-of-interest.html
Conflict of interest cases https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Case?classification=2774
Dergipark, Announcements-Developments: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/announcement
Dergipark, help: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/announcement
Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works, Definitions and Criteria for Authorship and Eligibility to be an Author: https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuatmetin/1.3.5846.pdf
YÖK (Council of Higher Education), Directive on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics for Higher Education Institutions - Definition of unfair authorship: https://www.yok.gov.tr/Documents/Mevzuat/yuksekogretim-kurumlari-bilimsel-arastirma-ve-yayin-etigi-yonergesi.pdf
TÜBİTAK, Definition of Unfair Authorship: https://tubitak.gov.tr/sites/default/files/2024-05/277_islenmis_hali_1.pdf
TÜBİTAK Generative Artificial Intelligence Guide: ( https://tubitak.gov.tr/tr/kurumsal/hakkimizda/uretken-yapay-zeka-rehberi)
WARNING: The content of the “Ethical Principles and Publication Policy” was prepared by the Coordination Office for Scientific Journals and Publications at Kyrgyzstan-Turkey Manas University and is licensed under the Creative Commons CC-BY-NC (Open Access, Attribution, Non-Commercial) 4.0 license.
The Journal of Turkic Civilization Studies is published under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.