Kilis 7 Aralık University Journal of Academic Research and Studies is a peer-reviewed journal published in accordance with the following ethical principles and rules in order to publish original, scientific studies in the basic fields of Economics and Administrative Sciences (such as Economics, Business Administration, Political Science and Public Administration, Finance, International Relations, Labor Economics and Industrial Relations). Articles submitted to the Journal of Academic Research and Studies are evaluated through a double blind peer review process and authors are provided with free access to publish their work.


In the ethical duties and responsibilities adopted by Kilis 7 Aralık University Journal of Academic Research and Studies, the principles published by the Directive on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics of Higher Education Institutions, Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), COPE Ethical Behavior and Best Practices Guide for Journal Editors and COPE Best Practices Guide for Journal Editors are taken into consideration. In this context, it is important that those who contribute to the publication process (authors, readers and researchers, publisher, referees and editors) fulfill the following responsibilities to ensure ethical principles. In addition, information on plagiarism and unethical behavior in the Journal of Academic Research and Studies is provided.

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

1. Any responsibility arising from non-compliance with ethical principles belongs to the author(s).

2. Author(s) are expected to submit original manuscripts in either Turkish or English and written in the main fields of Economics and Administrative Sciences (such as Economics, Business Administration, Political Science and Public Administration, Finance, International Relations, Labor Economics and Industrial Relations). In case the author(s) utilize other works or use other works, they are required to cite and/or quote them completely and accurately.

3. Individuals who did not contribute to the preparation of the study should not be listed as authors.

4. The author(s) may be requested to provide raw data on their manuscripts within the framework of the evaluation processes, in such a case, the author(s) should be ready to provide the expected data and information to the editorial board and scientific committee.

5. In the event that the author(s) notices a deficiency or error in the published, pre-checked or evaluated manuscript, the author(s) has the responsibility to inform the journal editor or the publisher, and to cooperate with the editor in the correction or withdrawal process.

6. Author(s) cannot have their work in the application process of more than one journal at the same time. Each application can be started after the completion of the previous application. The work published in another journal cannot be submitted to the Journal of Academic Research and Studies. During the article submission process, a file named "Additional File" containing the "Copyright Agreement" and information about the work and authors should be prepared and uploaded to the system separately from the article file.


7. For a study for which the evaluation process has already started, procedures such as adding or removing authors or changing the order of authors should not be requested, but corrections can be made in case of title and institutional changes.

8. Articles that do not comply with the publication principles will not be included in the referee evaluation process.

9. Authors of articles published in the journal are not paid royalties in cash.

Ethical Responsibilities of Referees

The Journal of Academic Research and Studies carries out the evaluation process of the manuscripts with the principle of double blind refereeing. In this process, reviewer comments on the evaluation forms and full texts are sent to the author(s) by the editor via the journal management system (dergipark). At this point, referees evaluating manuscripts for the Journal of Academic Research and Studies are expected to consider the following ethical responsibilities:

1. Reviewers should agree to review only those manuscripts that they can spare the time and that fall within their area of expertise to review.

2. Reviewers should recognize that peer review is a product of effort and requires fair review with proper timing, and should act accordingly during the review process. Therefore, reviewers should complete the manuscript evaluation process as soon as possible.

3. Reviewers should act honestly, impartially and fairly in the evaluation of manuscripts based on the principle of confidentiality.

4. Reviewers should notify the journal editorial office in case of a possible conflict of interest regarding the author or the study. This conflict of interest may be related to different issues. For example, if the referee realizes or guesses the author of the study, he/she should notify the journal editor and withdraw from the review. Similarly, if the referee is conducting research on a topic very similar to the subject of the study submitted during the evaluation process, he/she has the right to notify the journal management and withdraw from refereeing.

5. Reviewers should not agree to review the manuscript just to have a look at the manuscript without the intention of making an evaluation. Withdrawing as a referee after glancing at the article is incompatible with the principles of academic ethics.

6. Reviewers should use constructive and courteous language when evaluating. They should refrain from making derogatory personal comments that include hostility, slander and insult.

7. Referees should fill out the article evaluation form completely and prepare a justified report in case of rejection.

8. Referees should keep the details of the manuscript and the evaluation process confidential even after the end of the article evaluation process.

Ethical Responsibilities of the Editor-in-Chief and Editors

1. Editors are obliged to implement the Blind Review and Evaluation Process policies in the journal publication policies. In this context, the editor ensures that each manuscript is evaluated fairly, impartially and in a timely manner.

2. The editors may decide to accept or reject a manuscript for publication based solely on the value, originality, simplicity, and focus and scope of the journal.

3. The editor should initiate the evaluation process of the manuscript submitted to the journal immediately.

4. The editor has full authority and responsibility to accept or reject a manuscript submitted to the journal. However, at the end of the evaluation process, he takes into account the opinions of the referees at the decision-making stage.
5. At least two referees are consulted at the evaluation stage, and in case of one acceptance and one rejection, a third referee may be asked to evaluate the manuscript.

6. Editors should inform the author about their reasoned decision.

7. Editors should prefer referees who contribute to their fields with their publications, who are loyal to ethical principles and who will advance the publication processes of the journal.

8. When situations contrary to the ethical rules of scientific publication that are noticed by the editors about the studies or reported by the referees are identified, they are acted according to the Directive on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics of Higher Education Institutions.

9. The study in which an ethical violation is detected;

The phrase "Withdrawn:" is added at the beginning of the title in the electronic display.
Instead of the Abstract and Full Text contents in the electronic display, the reasons for the withdrawal of the study, detailed evidence sources, if any, are published together with the notifications of the institutions and organizations to which the author(s) are affiliated.
The withdrawal notice is announced on the main page of the journal website.
"Withdrawn." is added to the table of contents of the electronic and printed copy of the first issue to be published after the withdrawal date: Title of Study" in the table of contents of the electronic and printed copy of the first issue to be published from the date of retraction, and the reasons for the retraction and the original citations cited therein are shared with the public and researchers, starting from the first page.
The organization(s) to which the author(s) is affiliated will be notified of the above withdrawal notices.
In addition, the editorial board may recommend to the publishing houses or editorial boards of the previously published works of the author(s) of the ethically violated study to ensure the validity and reliability of the published studies or to withdraw them.
The editorial board may also recommend to the publishing houses or editorial boards of the previously published work of the author(s) of the ethically violated study to ensure the validity and reliability of the published work or to withdraw it.

Ethical Responsibilities of the Publisher

The Journal of Academic Research and Studies is published by Kilis 7 Aralık University, a non-profit organization that prioritizes public interest. The ethical responsibilities of the publisher are as follows:

1. The publisher acknowledges that the responsibility for the evaluation of the manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Academic Research and Studies and the decision-making authority in the publishing process lies with the editors.

2. The publisher provides open, electronic and free access to the journal's information and articles on the web page of the Journal of Academic Research and Studies.



Evaluation Process

1- The submitted studies are evaluated by the editor and/or members of the editorial board in terms of purpose, scope, method and writing principles.

2- The manuscripts that comply with the principles of publication and writing are sent to two referees, who are known for their works and studies in the field, without specifying the name of the author (blind refereeing) to be evaluated scientifically.

3- In the event that both referees give an opinion as "Suitable for Publication", the study is published in the volume and number to be determined by the Editorial Board as soon as possible.

4- If both referees give an opinion as "Not Suitable for Publication", the study is not published in the journal.

5- In the event that one of the referees gives a positive opinion about the publication of the study and the other one gives a negative opinion, the study is sent to a third referee; the report of the third referee is decisive in the publication of the study.

6- Manuscripts are not returned whether they are published or not. Authors are obliged to take into account the criticisms and suggestions of the referees regarding the work they send in case the referees request corrections.

7- It is the responsibility of the author to submit the corrected text to the journal within the specified period. The corrected manuscript may be re-examined by the referees who request changes if deemed necessary. Authors are not informed about the identity of the referees and referees are not informed about who the article belongs to (Blind Refereeing). Referee reports are placed in the archive for safekeeping.

8- It is planned to complete the preliminary evaluation phase of the submitted manuscripts in 2 weeks and the referee evaluation phase in 8 weeks. However, due to the lack of timely feedback from the referees, the process may be prolonged in cases such as the appointment of a new referee or the appointment of a third referee.

Plagiarism and Unethical Behavior

All articles submitted to the Journal of Academic Research and Studies are scanned with the Ithenticate (https://www.ithenticate.com/) software program and a similarity rate of more than 15%, non-compliance with the scientific requirements and being outside the scope of the journal's subject will be considered sufficient for the rejection of the article. The evaluation process is initiated for articles with a similarity rate below 15%. Articles exceeding this rate are examined in detail and if deemed necessary, they are sent back to the authors for revision or correction, and if plagiarism or unethical behavior is detected, they are not evaluated and rejected.


Actions against scientific research and publication ethics are as follows:

Plagiarism: Presenting the original ideas, methods, data or works of others as one's own work in whole or in part without proper citation in accordance with scientific rules,
Forgery: Using non-existent or falsified data in scientific research,
Distortion: Falsifying research records or data, falsifying devices or materials that were not used in the research, falsifying or shaping the results of the research in line with the interests of the persons and organizations receiving support,
Republishing: Presenting duplicate publications as separate publications for academic appointments and promotions,
Slicing: Inappropriately and inappropriately dividing the results of a research into parts in a way that disrupts the integrity of the research and publishing them in more than one issue and presenting these publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions,
Unfair authorship: Including or excluding people who have not actively contributed, changing the author ranking in an unjustified and inappropriate manner, removing the names of active contributors from the work in subsequent editions, using one's influence to have one's name included among the authors even though one has not actively contributed,
Failure to specify the persons, institutions or organizations providing support and their contributions in publications made as a result of research conducted with support,
Using theses or studies that have not yet been submitted or defended and accepted as a source without the permission of the owner,
Publishing data obtained in surveys and attitude surveys conducted within the scope of a scientific study without obtaining the explicit consent of the participants or, if the research is to be conducted in an institution, without obtaining the permission of the institution,
In research and experiments, not obtaining the necessary permissions in writing from the authorized units before starting the studies.



Some unethical behaviors are listed below:

Failing to indicate if the article is derived from the author's master's/doctoral thesis or a project/document,
Failure to report conflicts of interest regarding submitted manuscripts,
Deciphering the double blind review process.



In case you encounter an unethical situation in the Journal of Academic Research and Studies other than the ethical responsibilities mentioned above, please contact iibfdergi@kilis.edu.tr