Ethical values are one of the most important elements of all scientific study processes. For this reason, studies submitted to the journal are subjected to a completely confidential evaluation process. The information and ideas acquired during the evaluation are kept confidential; they cannot be used to gain an advantage in any way.
The journal pays regard to Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) on
https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishingAuthor's ResponsibilitiesThe authors check and confirm whether the work complies with the ethical standards, publication principles and writing rules adopted by the journal before it is sent to the journal.
It is the responsibility of the author(s) to prepare the work in accordance with the research and publication principles.
By submitting the work, the author undertakes that the work has been prepared in accordance with the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works No. 5846, the YÖK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive, and the research and publication ethics standards announced by COPE.
Peer review/responsibility for the reviewersThe referee completes the evaluation of the article, taking into account the principles in the link below explained by COPE, and submits it to the editorial board within the time allowed.
https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewersResponsibility of the Editor and Editorial Boarda) Impartiality: The editor conducts the evaluation process of the works regardless of the religion, gender, nationality and political view of the author.
b) Confidentiality: The principle of blind refereeing is protected during the publication process. The measures are taken to prevent the occurrence of a conflict of interest between the author and the referee.
c) Fairness: Considers the COPE guidelines in terms of compliance of the refereeing process with ethical standards.
https://publicationethics.org/files/What_To_Do_If_Suspect_Peer_Review_Manipulation.pdfd) Cooperation and coordination: Necessary cooperation and coordination is provided to complete the evaluation process of the works within the stipulated time.
e) Information sharing: In sharing information about the journal's publication process and article evaluation processes with other members of the Board, the principles in the link determined by COPE are observed.
https://publicationethics.org/files/Sharing%20_of_Information_Among_EiCs_guidelines_web_version_0.pdff) Ethical Issues: Regarding a work sent to the journal for publication or published in previous issues of the journal,
In case of duplicate publication, slicing, plagiarism, fabricated data, conflict of interest, and suspicion of unfair authorship, the standards in the link specified by COPE are respected.
In addition, attention is paid to the issues explained in the link on unfair authorship in terms of duplicate publication and slicing published by COPE.
https://publicationethics.org/guidance/GuidelinesThe above-mentioned rules are accepted by all authors who have uploaded articles to the journal.
Considerations Regarding Research Ethics
The journal adheres to the highest standards in research ethics and follows the principles of international research ethics as defined below. The authors are responsible for the compliance of the manuscripts with the ethical rules.
• Principles of integrity, quality, and transparency should be sustained in designing the research, reviewing the design, and conducting the research.
• The research team and participants should be fully informed about the aim, methods, possible uses, and requirements of the research and risks of participation in research.
• The confidentiality of the information provided by the research participants and the confidentiality of the respondents should be ensured. The research should be designed to protect the autonomy and dignity of the participants.
• Research participants should participate in the research voluntarily, not under any coercion.
• Any possible harm to participants must be avoided. The research should be planned in such a way that the participants are not at risk.
• The independence of research must be clear; and any conflict of interest or must be disclosed.
• In experimental studies with human subjects, written informed consent of the participants who decide to participate in the research must be obtained. In the case of children and those under wardship or with confirmed insanity, a legal custodian’s assent must be obtained.
• If the study is to be carried out in any institution or organization, approval must be obtained from this institution or organization.
• In studies with a human subject, it must be noted in the method section of the manuscript that the “informed consent of the participants and “ethics committee approval” from the institution where the study has been conducted have been obtained. Ethics committee approval should be uploaded to the journal system for related articles.
Plagiarism Policy
The studies submitted to the journal are evaluated within the framework of the similarity report declared at the application stage. Articles that do not comply with research and publication ethics or that have a risk of plagiarism are not evaluated. In this framework, if the similarity rate detected by the screening programs is above 15%, the relevant study cannot be published even if it receives the approval of the referee. If the study was published without noticing the situation, access to the relevant study is blocked and the study is removed from the publication list and the full issue when the situation is noticed. Journal management accepts the results of self-employed plagiarism/similarity programs as a corporate standard, not as a violation of ethics. For detailed information about the plagiarism policy, you can visit the Plagiarism Policy page. The ethical and legal responsibility of the studies belongs primarily to the authors.
The editorial board of Journal of Media and Religion Studies complies with the following rules for plagiarism policy:
The articles with an overall similarity index of greater than 20% are rejected without proceeding for the formal peer review. In such cases, the author(s) will be asked to re-revise the article within three weeks. The similarity index for a single source must be equal to or lower than 5%. Editors may also choose to run a similarity report at any other point during the review process or post-publication.
Evaluation Process, Duration and Peer Review Policy
Preliminary Control
• When a manuscript is submitted to the Journal, it is first pre-checked for compliance with the ethical principles and publication policy and author guidelines.
• The time required for the relevant secretary to process the article is maximum 10 days. Within the pre-control process, the time given to the secretary is maximum 10 days.
Editorial Pre-Control
• The manuscripts that are determined to meet the necessary prerequisites are assigned to the editor/field editor and the editor decides whether the manuscript should be taken to the peer review stage within 5 days.
• At this stage, the editor(s) may reject the article as a result of the editorial evaluation. Or they may make editorial editing suggestions to the author.
• English articles are forwarded to the foreign language editor at this stage and their linguistic appropriateness is checked.
Peer Review
• After the editorial evaluation, the manuscripts are sent to two referees in accordance with the double-blind refereeing process, and at this stage, it is ensured that the referees are from different institutions from the author.
• The response time to the invitation sent to the referee for evaluation is 7 days. The evaluation period is 15 days.
• This period(s) can be extended by the editor and/or field editors. If the process is prolonged, the editor and/or field editors may appoint new referees.
• As a result of their evaluation, referees can directly accept, suggest minor corrections, suggest major corrections, or directly reject the manuscript.
• If both referees give an opinion in favor of acceptance, the article is accepted. If both referees give an opinion for rejection, the article is rejected.
• If the referees give a positive opinion about the publication of the article, it is decided to send the article to the author(s) to make the necessary corrections in line with the referees' revisions. After the revisions, the publication process begins.
• In the event that one of the referees expresses a positive opinion on the publication of the article and the other one expresses a negative opinion, a third referee will be determined and the editor and/or the editorial board will decide to publish or reject the article in line with the decision of the third referee.
• Authors can make justified objections to the evaluation result in a scientific way and by referencing the grounds. The objections are reviewed by the editorial board as soon as possible. Opinions may be requested from the relevant referees about the objections. Authors are notified positively or negatively about the results. If the authors' objections to the evaluation result are found to be positive, the editorial board appoints new referees appropriate to the field of the study, and in this case, the peer review process is restarted.
• Authors must implement the referee revisions within 14 days. Otherwise, the manuscript will be rejected and removed from the system. In very special cases, authors may request additional time from the editor.
• Upon completion of the peer review, manuscripts are assigned to a foreign language editor to check the English abstracts and extended abstracts before acceptance.
Editorial Final Control and Preparation for Publication
• At this stage, the manuscripts whose referee evaluations have been completed are checked by the final editor and, if deemed necessary, may be forwarded to the author for editing. The process is expected to be completed within a maximum of 5 days.
• At this stage, the manuscripts are included in the final reading, DOI identification, and design processes. The maximum processing time is 10 days.
Candidate manuscripts are normally expected to complete the publication review process within 3 months.
December 30, 2022
Page
295-313
