Our journal has adopted the national and international principles of ethical publishing issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and the Higher Education Council Regulation on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics.

A. Authorship and Contribution Policy

Marmara Journal of Philosophy adopts the international authorship principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

All authors named in a manuscript are expected to have made a substantial academic contribution and to share responsibility for the content of the work. Individuals who wish to be listed as authors must meet all four of the following criteria. Those who do not meet these criteria should not be identified as authors: (i) making a substantial contribution to the conceptualization or design of the work, or to the processes of data collection, analysis, or interpretation; (ii) drafting the work or reviewing it critically in a way that significantly improves its content; (iii) approving the final version to be published; and (iv) taking responsibility for all aspects of the work and being able to respond appropriately to questions concerning the accuracy of the research.

The responsibilities of the corresponding author of manuscripts submitted to our journal are as follows: (i) ensuring that all authors meet the authorship criteria; (ii) managing communication with the journal during submission, peer review, and post-publication processes; and (iii) obtaining the approval of all authors for the final version of the manuscript and all revisions.

Our journal requires a CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) statement that clearly specifies each author’s contribution to the work. This statement should be presented in the manuscript under the heading “Author Contributions”. In the case of single-authored manuscripts, the statement “This is a single-authored study” should be used explicitly.

Any change to the order of authorship after manuscript submission, including the addition or removal of authors or changes in author order, requires the submission of (i) the reason for the change, (ii) the written approval of all authors, including those added or removed, and (iii) the approval of the editor. The editorial team may request additional documentation where necessary or reject changes that are contrary to ethical principles.

It is of great importance that authors submitting manuscripts to our journal observe the following ethical responsibilities and avoid ethical violations in order to safeguard the reliability of scientific research and academic integrity:

1. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors undertake that the works they submit are entirely original and have not been copied or imitated from other works without proper referencing. Ideas, data, or statements belonging to others must be clearly quoted and cited.
2. Fabrication: Authors must refrain from fabrication, which refers to producing data that do not actually exist or using falsified data in scientific research. This constitutes an ethical violation that seriously undermines the reliability of the research.
3. Distortion: Authors must also refrain from distortion, which refers to the deliberate presentation of research findings in a misleading manner. Altering research records or obtained data, presenting devices or materials that were not used as if they had been used, or shaping research results in accordance with the interests of individuals or institutions that provided support fall within the scope of this violation.
4. Data Fabrication and Data Falsification: Data fabrication refers to producing non-existent data, results, or sources and presenting them as genuine. Data falsification refers to altering research materials, instruments, processes, or data in a way that misrepresents the research record, such as deleting data points, modifying graphs, or manipulating images. Marmara Journal of Philosophy strictly prohibits practices such as data fabrication and data falsification in manuscripts. Such practices are contrary to academic integrity and are regarded as scientific misconduct.
5. Fragmented Publication: It is also considered an ethical violation for authors to divide the results of a single study into separate parts in a way that compromises the integrity of the research, publish them as if they were separate studies, and present these publications as separate works in academic career processes. This practice may lead to the misrepresentation of scientific findings.
6. Multiple and Simultaneous Publication: Authors should be aware that submitting the same work, or substantially similar content, to more than one journal simultaneously constitutes an ethical violation. Authors must inform the journal if the work has been published elsewhere or is under review elsewhere. Presenting a previously published work as a new study in academic appointment and promotion processes is considered duplicate publication and constitutes an ethical violation. Such publications, which increase scientific output through repetition, undermine academic integrity.
7. Citation: Authors are required to cite appropriately all sources used in their work.
8. Author List and Authorship: Our journal strictly rejects unethical authorship practices such as guest authorship, which refers to listing individuals who have made no genuine contribution as authors; ghost authorship, which refers to failing to list individuals who have contributed to the work as authors; and gift authorship, which refers to adding names for personal benefit or in expectation of reciprocity. Authorship must be limited to individuals who have made a substantial contribution to the work. Authors must be listed in the correct order according to the level of their contribution. Individuals who have contributed to the work but do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged. Failure to observe fair contribution in scientific research leads to such ethical violations. In cases where such practices are suspected, action is taken in accordance with COPE procedures.
9. Data Access and Retention: Authors should be prepared to provide the raw data of their research to the editorial board or to the appropriate supervisory authorities upon request, and should ensure that the data are retained for an appropriate period in a manner that supports the accuracy of the results presented in the paper.
10. Conflicts of Interest: Authors must clearly disclose all financial or other conflicts of interest that may influence their research or interpretations. In such cases, appropriate disclosures must be made on the platform where the work is published.
11. Human and Animal Experiments: Authors must confirm that the relevant ethics committee approvals have been obtained for all studies involving human and animal subjects, and that the research has been conducted in accordance with ethical principles. The privacy of voluntary participants must be respected, and their rights must be protected.
12. Post-Publication Correction and Retraction: If authors identify a serious error or inaccuracy in a published work, they must immediately inform the journal editor and cooperate in retracting or correcting the work. Erroneous publications must be corrected in order to preserve the accuracy of the scientific record.
13. Cooperation During the Review Process: Authors must cooperate in providing any additional information requested by reviewers or editors during the evaluation of the submitted manuscript. They should be transparent in providing supplementary documents related to the work and in responding to questions.

 B. Plagiarism and Anti-Plagiarism Policy

Marmara Journal of Philosophy attaches great importance to preserving originality and ethical values in scholarly work.Plagiarism is a violation of the principles of academic integrity and is not accepted by our journal under any circumstances. Plagiarism refers to presenting another person’s work or ideas as one’s own without proper citation or permission. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subjected to similarity screening through Turnitin. In accordance with the plagiarism policy of Marmara Journal of Philosophy:

1. If the Turnitin report of a manuscript indicates a similarity rate exceeding 20%, the manuscript is returned.
2. The similarity rate with any single source must not exceed 4%.
3. Even if the overall similarity rate is below 20%, the manuscript is returned if plagiarism is detected in a single sentence.

Authors should exercise due care to avoid plagiarism in the manuscripts they submit, cite all sources appropriately, and ensure that quotations are accurately presented. The commission of various forms of plagiarism, whether knowingly or unknowingly, is contrary to the rules of academic integrity. Papers in which plagiarism is detected are withdrawn from the publication process, and the authors are informed accordingly.

C. Use of Artificial Intelligence

Marmara Journal of Philosophy attaches great importance to ethical principles concerning the use of artificial intelligence tools in the academic writing process. The use of artificial intelligence tools remains a subject of debate in the international publishing community, and practices in this field continue to evolve. Artificial intelligence tools may be regarded as supportive tools, particularly for authors who are not native speakers of English or for researchers who experience difficulties in written expression. However, such uses also require full transparency and explicit disclosure. Artificial intelligence tools, however, cannot be listed as authors. The author(s) remain responsible for all content, including sections generated by artificial intelligence. The originality, accuracy, and compliance of the generated content with publication ethics must be guaranteed by the author(s). If authors have made use of any artificial intelligence tool during the manuscript preparation process, such as ChatGPT, Gemini, NotebookLM, Grammarly, DeepL, or similar tools, they must disclose this at the end of the paper within the section of the “author declaration.”

 D. Editorial Confidentiality Obligation

Editorial processes at Marmara Journal of Philosophy are conducted in accordance with high standards of confidentiality. The obligation of editorial confidentiality is implemented in line with the journal’s principles of transparency, reliability, and academic ethics as follows:

1. Paper Confidentiality: Editors, reviewers, and other journal officials must keep confidential the content of papers under review. All information concerning a manuscript may be used only for purposes related to the evaluation process and must not be shared with third parties.
2. Identities of Authors and Reviewers: The identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential in accordance with the double-blind peer review system. Editors ensure an impartial review process by keeping the identities of authors and reviewers concealed from one another.
3. Review Process: The security and confidentiality of information obtained during the paper review process are ensured by the journal’s editorial team. Reviewers must use any information obtained during the review process solely for evaluation purposes and must not disclose such information in any form.

At the same time, our journal requires that all research involving personal or sensitive data or materials concerning human participants that are not legally publicly available be subject to formal ethical review. The confidentiality of participants and the protection of personal data are among the fundamental principles of research ethics, and all relevant national and international regulations must be observed.

E. Journal Boards and Responsibilities

a. Responsibilities of the Publisher: The publisher of Marmara Journal of Philosophy is the Rector of Marmara University on behalf of Marmara University and the Dean of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences on behalf of the faculty. The publisher fulfils the following responsibilities:

1. The publisher is responsible for ensuring that the journal’s principles of publication ethics are fully implemented by all stakeholders.
2. The publisher undertakes to provide free and continuous open access to the journal content, as well as to ensure the archiving and preservation of publications.
3. In cases involving violations of scientific publication ethics, such as misconduct, plagiarism, conflicts of interest, and copyright infringement, the publisher is responsible for taking the necessary steps and ensuring that the matter is clarified.

b. Responsibilities of the Editorial Board: The Editorial Board of Marmara Journal of Philosophy meets at least twice a year and fulfills the following duties:

1. Members of the Editorial Board accept the journal’s principles and policies of publication ethics and make decisions in accordance with these principles.
2. Where deemed necessary, they determine the thematic topics of the journal and decide on the individuals to whom theme editorship or guest editorship may be offered for the relevant thematic issue.
3. They make recommendations for membership of the journal’s Advisory Board.
4. They offer suggestions aimed at increasing the national and international visibility of the journal.
5. In cases where suspicion arises concerning violations of scientific publication ethics, such as misconduct, plagiarism, conflicts of interest, copyright infringement, and text recycling, they are obliged to inform the editorial team.
6. They make recommendations regarding indexing databases in which the journal may be included in order to enhance its academic quality.

c. Responsibilities of the Editor-in-chief: The editor-in-chief of Marmara Journal of Philosophy is Assoc. Prof. Dr. Erdal Yılmaz. The editor-in-chief is responsible for strictly adhering to ethical standards in academic publishing processes and to the principles established by COPE. In this regard, the main responsibilities of the editor-in-chief are listed below:

1. Impartiality and Transparency: (i) The editor-in-chief must evaluate manuscripts impartially on the basis of their scholarly merit. (ii) It is the responsibility of the editor-in-chief to ensure that the manuscript evaluation process is transparent and fair, and to maintain open communication with authors and reviewers at every stage of the process.
2. Confidentiality: The editor-in-chief must preserve confidentiality during the evaluation process. Authors’ manuscripts must not be disclosed to anyone other than the reviewers and the editorial team. Reviewer reports must also be kept confidential and shared only with the relevant parties.
3. Conflicts of Interest: The editor-in-chief must prevent conflicts of interest during the evaluation of manuscripts. Manuscripts authored by the Editor-in-chief, by authors with whom the editor-in-chief has personal interest-based relationships, or by researchers with whom the editor-in-chief is in competition must not be considered for evaluation.
4. Publication Decision: (i) The editor-in-chief decides whether a manuscript is to be published by taking into account the reviewer reports, the field editor’s opinion on the manuscript, and the scientific validity of the work. The publication decision must be based on the scholarly quality of the manuscript, independently of the author’s academic title or institutional affiliation. (ii) In the event of a rejection decision, the editor-in-chief must notify the author(s) together with the reasons for the decision.
5. Management of the Peer Review Process: (i) The editor-in-chief must carefully manage the double-blind peer review process and conduct communication between reviewers and authors in a fair and effective manner. (ii) The editor-in-chief must evaluate the feedback received from reviewers impartially and convey it to the author(s).
6. Handling Ethical Violations: (i) The editor-in-chief must take seriously any ethical violations identified in manuscripts, such as plagiarism, misrepresentation, fabrication, and similar violations, and must take the necessary steps within the framework of the ethical rules established by COPE. (ii) In response to complaints concerning ethical violations, the editor-in-chief must publish the necessary corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern.
7. Continuity of the Publication Process: The editor-in-chief is responsible for maintaining the journal’s publication process without interruption. The editor-in-chief must take the necessary steps to ensure quality and continuity at all stages of the publication process.
8. Innovation and Development: The editor-in-chief must develop new ideas and approaches in order to ensure the continuous development of the journal, and must contribute to enhancing the journal’s reputation through cooperation with the scholarly community.
9. Categories of Journal Content: (i) The journal may include texts that do not require peer review, such as commentaries, review articles, conference reviews, notes, event reports, and book and film reviews. The distinction between peer-reviewed publications and publications that do not require peer review is clearly stated.
   (ii) The editor-in-chief may develop comments and recommendations regarding the category under which a submitted manuscript may be published in the journal and share this with the author. The final decision rests with the author and/or the Editor-in-chief.

d. Responsibilities of the Field Editors: Marmara Journal of Philosophy has five field editors. The responsibilities to be fulfilled by the field editors are as follows:

1. Paper Evaluation: The field editor evaluates papers in the field assigned to them. They examine whether the manuscripts comply with the journal’s thematic focus, author guidelines, and quality standards. The field editor also checks whether the author has properly uploaded the forms required during the submission process. Within seven days after receiving the manuscript, the field editor submits a preliminary evaluation report to the editor-in-chief. In accordance with the decision of the editor-in-chief, the evaluation process may either continue or be terminated.
2. Management of the Peer Review Process: The field editor assigns manuscripts to reviewers who are experts in the relevant field and ensures that reviewer reports are collected. They share the feedback received from reviewers with the authors and follow up on the necessary revisions. During this process, the field editor makes the necessary arrangements to preserve the anonymity of authors and reviewers.
3. Communication with Authors: The field editor communicates directly with authors and provides guidance for the improvement of their manuscripts. During this process, they respond to authors’ questions and provide the necessary feedback.
4. Content Editing and Revision: Based on the reviewers’ comments and their own evaluations, the field editor makes recommendations for improving the manuscript in scholarly and linguistic terms. They review the authors’ revisions and evaluate whether the final version is suitable. 
5. Compliance with the Journal’s Editorial Policies: The field editor examines the content of manuscripts in order to ensure compliance with the journal’s general editorial policy and, where necessary, makes recommendations to the editor.
6. Publication Quality and Consistency: Field editors ensure that the published articles are of high quality and contribute to their respective fields by maintaining the journal’s overall academic and scholarly standards.
7. Recommendation on the Decision: As a result of the peer reviews conducted on the manuscript and their own evaluation, the field editor makes a recommendation regarding whether the manuscript should be accepted, rejected, or revised. This recommendation is submitted to the Editor-in-chief.
8. Reporting to the Editor: The field editor reports to The editor-in-chief their final decision recommendation concerning the manuscripts they have reviewed and the related peer review processes. The final decision regarding the manuscript is made by the editor-in-chief in light of the reviewer evaluations and the field editor’s opinion.

e. Responsibilities of the Assistant Editors: Marmara Journal of Philosophy has two assistant editors. The responsibilities to be fulfilled by the assistant editors are as follows:

1. Management of Daily Operations: Assistant editors are responsible for managing the daily operations of the journal. They ensure that editorial processes proceed smoothly, monitor the stages of content production, and coordinate the regular implementation of the publication schedule.
2. Editorial Calendar and Content Planning: They prepare the editorial calendar of the journal and ensure that content production is carried out in accordance with this calendar. They plan and implement the necessary steps for the timely submission, editing, and preparation of manuscripts for publication.
3. Management of the Editorial Team: They maintain close coordination with field editors, authors, reviewers, and other members of the editorial team. They assign tasks and monitor the performance of team members.
4. Content and Quality Control: They check whether the content to be published complies with editorial standards. They review manuscripts in terms of grammar, style, and accuracy of content, and ensure that the necessary corrections are made.
5. Monitoring the Peer Review Process: They communicate with field editors and reviewers to ensure that manuscripts are sent to peer review and that this process proceeds properly. They ensure that reviewer reports are completed on time and monitor the process.
6. Coordination with the Editor: Assistant editors are responsible for implementing the editor’s overall strategic decisions. They work closely with the editor to ensure the implementation of the publication policy and the achievement of the journal’s general objectives.
7. Communication and Problem-Solving: They actively communicate with authors, editors, and other relevant parties in order to resolve problems that may arise during the publication process. They are responsible for quickly resolving delays or problems in the publication process.
8. Final Editing and Publication Approval: They carry out the final editing of content to be published and ensure the final checks required to make it ready for publication. They make sure that the content to be published complies with all quality standards and coordinate with language editors and the design unit.
9. Participation in the Proofreading Process: Assistant editors may be assigned by the editor to take part in the proofreading process and play an active role in this process. In this context, they perform the following duties: (i) Paper Check: They review the final version of manuscripts to be published and evaluate them in terms of language, content, flow, and overall coherence. (ii) Reference Check: They check the references section of the manuscript and ensure that all citations are made correctly. They verify whether the references comply with the formatting standards determined by the journal. (iii) Language Corrections: They correct grammatical errors, spelling mistakes, and stylistic shortcomings in the manuscript. They seek to ensure a coherent flow consistent with the author’s writing style. (iv) Preparation for Design: They make the necessary arrangements for the manuscript to be sent to design and check the manuscripts returned from the design process. (v) Finalization: They finalize the manuscript in coordination with the authors. They make the necessary revisions by taking the authors’ feedback into account. (vi) Obtaining a Plagiarism Report: At the beginning of the publication process, they obtain a plagiarism report and check the manuscript’s compliance with the rules of scientific ethics. (vii) Final Approval: They ensure that the manuscript is reviewed one final time before publication. They confirm that there are no errors or omissions. (viii) Providing Feedback: They communicate with authors to provide feedback on corrections and help them finalize their manuscripts. (ix) Contribution to the Publication Process: They complete all necessary steps to ensure that the publication process proceeds quickly and efficiently and contribute to the editorial process.

f. Duties and Responsibilities of Language Editors: The duties of language editors begin after a manuscript has been accepted for publication and include carrying out the final pre-publication revisions of the text. In this process, language editors make the necessary corrections to ensure the linguistic accuracy and fluency of the manuscript.

1. Editing During the Proofreading Process: After a manuscript has been accepted for publication, it is forwarded by the assistant editor to the copyediting and language editors. The editors review the manuscript in terms of spelling errors, grammar, punctuation, and style. They make the necessary corrections to render the author’s text more fluent and professional in linguistic terms.
2. Providing Feedback to Authors: After language and copyediting revisions have been completed, authors may be asked to make additional corrections where necessary. In this process, language editors provide feedback to authors and ensure that the proposed changes are implemented.
3. Review of the Full Text, Abstract, and Extended Abstracts: In addition to the main text of the manuscript, language editors check whether the abstract and extended abstracts comply with grammatical and spelling rules. They ensure that these sections are clear and accurate in terms of meaning.
4. Implementation of Writing Standards: Language editors check whether the language used in the manuscript complies with the writing and grammar standards determined by the journal. In manuscripts written in Turkish and English, they ensure that both languages are used accurately and consistently.
5. Sending the Revised Text to the Author: After the corrections and revisions have been completed, the text is shared with the author and, where necessary, the author is asked to make the final revisions.
6. Contribution to the Publication Process: After language revisions have been completed and the authors’ feedback has been received, the final version of the manuscript is submitted to the assistant editor. As a result of the work of the language editors, the text becomes ready for publication, and the publication process is continued by the assistant editor.

g. Responsibilities of Reviewers: Reviewers of Marmara Journal of Philosophy play an important role in scholarly publication processes and are required to fulfil their responsibilities regarding evaluation processes with due care. The main principles and recommendations concerning the responsibilities of reviewers and the review process are listed below:

1. Principle of Double-Blind Peer Review: Reviewers must act in accordance with the double-blind peer review process and fulfil the requirements of this process. In order to prevent possible familiarity between the reviewer and the author, reviewers are selected from different institutions, and manuscripts are sent with author information concealed. If the reviewer believes that they can identify the author upon seeing the manuscript, they must inform the editorial office and withdraw from the review process.
2. Review Timeline: When a reviewer agrees to evaluate a manuscript, they should make every effort to complete the report within the given timeframe. If a delay is expected for personal or other reasons, the journal editors must be informed. If an extension is needed, the reviewer should contact the editor.
3. Area of Expertise: If the subject of the manuscript falls outside the reviewer’s area of expertise, or if the reviewer believes that they are able to evaluate only part of the manuscript, they must inform the editors. Reviewers are not expected to evaluate works that fall outside their field of competence.
4. Principle of Conflict of Interest: Reviewers are obliged to inform the editors if there is any conflict of interest during the review process. In particular, reviewers should not undertake the review task if they are acquainted with the author or have a personal connection with them. In addition, reviewers must inform the editors if they detect self-plagiarism or text recycling in the manuscript under review.
5. Confidentiality and Objectivity: Manuscripts sent to reviewers are confidential and must not be used, reproduced, or shared in any way by the reviewer during the evaluation process. Reviewers must be impartial and objective in their evaluations and must not discriminate on the basis of nationality, gender, religion, class, or similar grounds.
6. Detailed Review Reports and Comments: Reviewers should avoid general statements during the review process and should provide detailed and concrete recommendations. For example, statements such as “this is a successful article and may be published” are insufficient; the reviewer should explain the manuscript’s contribution to the literature, its strengths, and the aspects that need improvement. In addition to review reports, the reviewer should add specific comments and corrections to the text.
7. Completion of Review Forms: The review form submitted through the system must be completed, and decisions must be explained together with their justifications. The reviewer should convey their comments and revision suggestions regarding the manuscript through the form and provide authors with concrete recommendations that offer guidance.
8. Reviewer Anonymity and Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must avoid statements in their review reports or in corrections made on the manuscript that may enable the author to identify them. Anonymity must be preserved during the review process, and the evaluation must be kept entirely confidential. In addition, any conflicts of interest that arise during the review process must be reported to the editorial office.
9. Contribution to the Review Process: If a reviewer intends to receive input from other academics or researchers during the review process, this must be clearly stated and brought to the attention of the editorial office.
10. Citation of the Reviewer’s Own Work: Reviewers must not require authors to cite their own works and may suggest citations only on valid academic grounds. When making such a suggestion, the reviewer must not use any expression that may reveal or imply the author’s identity.
11. Observance of the Journal’s Aims: Marmara Journal of Philosophy expects reviewers to adopt a constructive and critical approach in line with the aims of the journal.
12. Detection of Plagiarism: Submitted manuscripts are subjected to Turnitin similarity checks before the peer review process. If plagiarism that does not appear in the program or that emerges during the revision process is detected, reviewers must inform the editorial office.
13. Post-Review Responsibilities: The obligation to maintain confidentiality concerning the manuscript and the process continues after the review process has been completed. Reviewers should make an effort to respond to requests for revision and re-evaluation. If new circumstances arise that may affect the evaluation, the editorial office must be informed.