If any non-compliance with academic and ethical principles is detected at any stage of the review process, the review process will be immediately halted, regardless of the stage, and the manuscript will be returned to the author(s) along with the reasons for the decision.
The Journal Editorial Board, the Editor-in-Chief, and the Journal Secretariat are responsible for ensuring the confidentiality of all manuscripts submitted to the journal until publication; no information regarding the manuscripts may be disclosed to anyone other than the author(s).
Manuscripts submitted to the journal are evaluated using a double-blind peer review system. In the event of conflicting or insufficient referee evaluations, the Editorial Board may request additional referee evaluations.
The primary duty of referees is to contribute to the Editorial Board’s decision regarding the publication of the submitted works. Referees are obligated to maintain confidentiality during their evaluations and may not use the information obtained during the evaluation process for personal purposes or interests. Reviewers must remain objective in their critiques and focus their evaluations on the work itself, avoiding personal comments directed at the author(s).
The Review Process for works submitted to the journal is detailed. The final decision regarding works to be published in the journal rests with the Editorial Board. The journal is not obligated to provide a justification to authors of works that are not published.
Authors are obligated to submit original work to the journal and must cite the sources used in their work in accordance with academic standards. If a violation of this requirement is detected, the work will be rejected.
Authors must not submit the same work or a similar study to more than one journal. Simultaneous submission of the same work to multiple journals is unethical and will result in the rejection of the work upon detection.
Authors are expected to submit original work. If authors draw upon or use other works, they must provide complete and accurate citations and/or quotations.
Individuals who have not made an intellectual contribution to the content of the work should not be listed as authors.
All works submitted for publication must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and related relationships.
Authors may be requested to provide raw data related to their articles during the review process; in such cases, authors must be prepared to submit the required data and information to the editorial board and the scientific committee.
Authors must possess documentation demonstrating that they hold the necessary rights to use the data, have obtained the required permissions for research/analysis, or have obtained informed consent from study participants.
If the author(s) discover an error or inaccuracy in their published work, work in early view, or work under review, they are obligated to notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor in the process of correction or retraction.
Authors may not submit their work to multiple journals simultaneously. Each submission may be initiated only after the previous one has been completed.
Once the review process has begun, changes to author responsibilities (such as adding an author, changing the author order, or removing an author) cannot be proposed.
Editors and section editors must adhere to the following ethical duties and responsibilities, based on the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as open access documents.
Editors are responsible for every publication. In this context, editors have the following roles and obligations:
Making efforts to meet the information needs of readers and authors,
Ensuring the continuous development of the journal,
Implementing processes to enhance the quality of works published in the journal,
Supporting freedom of thought,
Ensuring academic integrity,
Maintaining business processes without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards,
Demonstrating transparency and openness in publication regarding issues requiring correction or clarification.
The evaluation of all submissions through double-blind peer review directly impacts publication quality. This process ensures objectivity and independence in the evaluation, thereby building trust.
Reviewers may not communicate directly with authors; evaluations and comments are transmitted through the journal’s management system. During this process, review forms and reviewers’ comments on the full text are conveyed to the author(s) via the editor.
Reviewers should only accept evaluations of studies within their area of expertise.
They must conduct evaluations with impartiality and confidentiality.
If they believe they are facing a conflict of interest during the review process, they must decline to review the work and inform the journal editor.
In accordance with the principle of confidentiality, they must destroy the works they have reviewed after the review process. They may use only the final versions of the works they have reviewed, and only after they have been published.
They must conduct the review objectively, focusing solely on the content of the work. They must not allow nationality, gender, religious beliefs, political beliefs, or commercial concerns to influence the evaluation.
They must conduct the evaluation in a constructive and polite manner. They must not make derogatory personal comments containing hostility, slander, or insults.
They must complete the evaluation of the accepted manuscript in a timely manner and in accordance with the ethical responsibilities outlined above.