Lectio Socialis fully accepts the COPE Code of Conduct and is managed under this code. The journal’s necessary policies in line with this code are as such:

Editor's Responsibilities

The journal maintains complete editorial independence from all authorities and institutions. The editor-in-chief is responsible for overseeing the unbiased review process of submitted manuscripts. The editor-in-chief ensures that reviewers are not affiliated with the same institution as the authors to maintain independence. If necessary, the editor-in-chief publishes corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies. Readers and authors can contact the editor-in-chief regarding any concerns they might have. The editor-in-chief guarantees the freedom of expression and intellectual standards, free from any business interests. The journal does not accept any advertisements. If deemed necessary, the author must provide approval from a research ethics committee to ensure compliance with international research and publication ethics. The editor-in-chief has to respond to the complaints received by e-mail and allow the authors whose work has been criticized to respond. The decision made by the editor to either accept or reject a manuscript for publication should be based on the manuscript's importance, authenticity/originality, clarity, and relevance of the study to the journal's scope. If authors feel the need to appeal the decision made, the editor-in-chief will review the appeal. If the appeal is about the editor-in-chief's conclusion, the issue will be brought to the Editorial Board. The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and potential reviewers. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper cannot be used by the editor or the editorial staff for their research purposes.

Reviewers' Responsibilities

The process of peer review is crucial in helping editors make informed decisions and assisting authors in improving their manuscripts. If a referee chosen for reviewing a manuscript feels unqualified to do so, they must inform the editor-in-chief. Manuscripts submitted for review must be kept confidential and only shared with the editor. It is vital to approach reviews objectively. Manuscript reviewers should identify any unpublished work that is not cited in the manuscript, as well as any significant similarity between the manuscript and a published work. Any confidential information or ideas acquired through peer review are considered privileged and must not be used for personal gain. Reviewers must abstain from reviewing manuscripts in which they have any conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or any other relationships or connections they may have with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.

Authors' Duties

- The manuscript should not be under review by any other journal. The corresponding author can withdraw the submission at any time before the review process starts. Even if there is no feedback given to the author within six months of the review process starting, the author can still withdraw their submission.
- It is important to present the underlying data accurately in original research reports. The manuscript should contain enough detail and references that allow others to replicate the work. Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study along with the paper as part of the editorial review process. They should also be willing to make the data publicly available if possible.
- Authors should only submit entirely original works and appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal is considered unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. Manuscripts under review by Lectio Socialis should not be resubmitted to copyrighted publications. However, by submitting a manuscript, the author(s) retain the rights to the published material. In case of publication, they permit the use of their work under a CC-BY license, which allows others to copy, distribute and transmit the work as well as to adapt the work and to make commercial use of it.
- The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors who have made significant contributions to the manuscript are listed and have approved the final version of the paper for submission.
- For clinical and experimental studies and research requiring an ethics committee decision, authors should obtain ethics committee approval, and this approval should be stated and documented in the article. For studies requiring an ethical committee decision, information about the approval (name of the board, date and number) should be included in the method section and also on the first/last page of the article. In case reports, information about the volunteer informed consent form being signed should be included in the article.
- If the research published in Lectio Socialis benefits from a fund, the authors are required to provide information about the fund to disclose all sources of financial support.
- If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly notify the editor-in-chief and cooperate with the editor-in-chief to retract or correct the article in the form of an erratum.
- A dedicated Author Contribution section must be included with the article to provide information about each author's contributions to the work. For this section, Lectio Socialis has adopted the CRediT classification, which allows for a standardized description of each author’s individual contributions to the reported study. This description is required for all authors during the submission process, and the submitting author is responsible for providing the contributions of all authors at submission. It is expected that all authors will have reviewed, discussed, and agreed to their individual contributions prior to submission.
- The contribution statement will be published with the final article and should accurately reflect the contributions to the work.

CRediT classification:  

CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) is a high-level taxonomy that includes 14 roles that can be used to represent the roles typically played by contributors to research outputs. The roles describe each contributor’s specific contribution to the scholarly output.

Conceptualization: This involves the formulation and development of overarching research goals and aims.

Data Curation: This refers to the management activities required to annotate (produce metadata), scrub data, and maintain research data (including software code, where necessary) for initial use and later reuse.

Formal Analysis: This involves the application of statistical, mathematical, computational, or other formal techniques to analyze or synthesize study data.

Funding Acquisition: This refers to the acquisition of financial support for the project leading to publication.

Investigation: This involves conducting research and investigation processes, specifically performing experiments or data/evidence collection.

Methodology: This involves the development or design of methodology and the creation of models.

Project Administration: This refers to the management and coordination responsibility for the research activity planning and execution.

Resources: This refers to the provision of study materials, reagents, materials, patients, laboratory samples, animals, instrumentation, computing resources, or other analysis tools.

Software: This involves programming, software development, designing computer programs, implementing the computer code and supporting algorithms, and testing of existing code components.

Supervision: This refers to the oversight and leadership responsibility for the research activity planning and execution, including mentorship external to the core team.

Validation: This involves the verification, whether as a part of the activity or separate, of the overall replication/reproducibility of results/experiments and other research outputs.

Visualization: This refers to the preparation, creation, and/or presentation of the published work, specifically visualization/data presentation.

Writing – Original Draft: This involves the preparation, creation, and/or presentation of the published work, specifically writing the initial draft, including substantive translation.

Writing – Review & Editing: This involves the preparation, creation, and/or presentation of the published work by those from the original research group, specifically critical review, commentary, or revision – including pre- or post-publication stages.

The list of contributions needs to follow the following format: [Contributor role: List of all authors under that role].

Example:

Conceptualization: Ahmet Kul, Fatma Yüksel (equal)
Formal Analysis: Ahmet Kul
Funding Acquisition: Fatma Yüksel
Writing – review and editing: Ahmet Kul
Writing –original draft: Fatma Kul

The corresponding author must confirm full access to all study data and take responsibility for data integrity and accuracy of analysis.