Publication Ethics and Principles

Necmettin Erbakan University Journal of the Faculty of Political Sciences (JNEUSBF) undertakes to apply publication ethics at the highest standards and to comply with the following principles of publication ethics. These principles are based on the recommendations and guidelines developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Council of Science Editors (CSE), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) and International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) for journal editors.

All stakeholders are expected to bear ethical responsibilities within the scope of publication ethics of Necmettin Erbakan University Journal of the Faculty of Political Sciences (JNEUSBF). In this context, the JNEUSBF journal undertakes to follow the Code of Conduct and Principles of Transparency and Best Practice prepared by the COPE (Publication Ethics). The monitoring of the Cope Guidelines for Editors (COPE GfE) is within the scope of the Editors' duty, and the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers(COPE for peer review) must be followed by the journal referees.

The publication processes implemented in Necmettin Erbakan University Journal of the Faculty of Political Sciences (JNEU SBF) form the basis for the development and distribution of information in an impartial and respectable manner. The processes implemented in this direction are directly reflected in the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support the authors. Peer-reviewed studies are studies that embody and support the scientific method. At this point, it is important that all stakeholders of the process (authors, readers and researchers, publisher, referees and editors) comply with the standards for ethical principles.

1. GENERAL ACTIONS AGAINST SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND PUBLICATION ETHICS
a) Plagiarism: To present the original ideas, methods, data or works of others as their own work, in whole or in part, without attribution in accordance with scientific rules,
b) Fraud: Using data that does not actually exist or that has been falsified in scientific research,

c) Distortion: To falsify research records or data obtained, to present devices or materials that are not used in the research as if they were used, to falsify or shape the research results in line with the interests of the people and institutions that receive support,
d) Republishing: To present the repetitive publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions,
e) Slicing: To present these publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions by dividing the results of a research in a way that violates the integrity of the research and in an inappropriate way and publishing it in more than one issue,
f) Unfair authorship: Including people who do not have an active contribution among the authors or not including those who do, changing the order of authors unjustifiably and inappropriately, removing the names of those who contributed actively from the work in subsequent editions, using his influence to include his name among the authors, although he did not have an active contribution,

(2) Other types of ethical violations are:
a) Not specifying the people, institutions or organizations that support them and their contributions in the publications made as a result of research carried out with support,
b) Using the thesis or studies that have not yet been presented or defended and accepted as a source without the permission of the owner,
c) Not complying with ethical rules in research on humans and animals, not respecting patient rights in their publications,
d) To act against the provisions of the relevant legislation in biomedical researches and other clinical researches related to humans,
e) To share the information contained in a work assigned for review with others before it is published without the express permission of the author,

f) To misuse the resources, places, facilities and devices provided or allocated for scientific research,

g)To allege unfounded, unfounded and deliberate ethical violations,

h)To publish the data obtained without obtaining the explicit consent of the participants in surveys and attitude studies conducted within the scope of a scientific study or, if the research will be conducted in an institution, without obtaining the permission of the institution,

i)Harming animal health and ecological balance in research and experiments,

j)Failing to obtain written permissions from the authorized units before starting the studies in research and experiments,

k)To carry out studies in research and experiments contrary to the provisions of the legislation or the international conventions to which Turkey is a party, regarding the relevant research and experiments.

l)Failure to comply with the obligation of researchers and authorities to inform and warn those concerned about possible harmful practices related to scientific research,

m)Not to use the data and information obtained from other persons and institutions in scientific studies, to the extent and in the manner permitted, not to comply with the confidentiality of this information and not to ensure its protection,

n)Making false or misleading statements regarding scientific research and publications in academic appointments and promotions, (Higher Education Committee of Turkey (YÖK) Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive, Article 4)

Within the framework of ethical rules; Studies that require Ethics Committee Permission for evaluation in the journal are as follows:
1. All kinds of research conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from the participants by using survey, interview, focus group work, observation, experiment, interview techniques,
2. The use of humans and animals (including material/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes,
3. Clinical studies on humans,
4. Animal studies,
5. Retrospective studies in accordance with the personal data protection law.

In this context, the studies to be evaluated in our journal;
1. Indicating that an “informed consent form” was taken in case reports,
2. Obtaining and specifying permission from the owners for the use of scales, questionnaires, photographs belonging to others,
3. It should be stated that copyright regulations are complied with for the intellectual and artistic works used.
4. Editors ensure the protection of human and animal rights in the reviewed studies. The editors are responsible for rejecting the study in the absence of the approval of the ethics committee on the subjects used in the study and the absence of any permission for experimental research. In studies that require ethics committee permission, information about the permission (name of the committee, 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 signing the informed consent/consent form should be included in the article.

2. STAKEHOLDER RESPONSIBILITIES

The status of the stakeholders and readers of the studies regarding scientific research and publication ethics, which they see in the reviews published inNecmettin Erbakan University Journal of the Faculty of Political Sciences (JNEUSBF), can be sent to neusbf@gmail.com or to the Necmettin Erbakan University Scientific Publications Coordinator (biyak@erbakan.edu.tr) welcomes their submissions.

a) Editors' Responsibilities
The editor and assistant editors of Necmettin Erbakan University Journal of the Faculty of Political Sciences (JNEUSBF) undertake to comply with the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors(for editors) and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal EditorsCOPE best for editors published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). It will provide the following ethical duties and responsibilities based on the principles of the Publication Ethics Flowcharts developed by COPE in possible cases of abuse or violation of publication ethics:

• Impartiality and Publisher's Freedom. Editors evaluate the submitted article proposals by considering their compatibility with the scope of the journal and the importance and originality of their work. Editors do not take into account the race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, nationality or political views of the authors submitting the article proposal. Other institutions other than the editorial board of the journal cannot influence the decision to edit or publish. The editors take care that the published issues contribute to the reader, researcher, practitioner and scientific field, and that they are original.

• Independence: The relationship between the Editors (Editor and Associate Editors) and the publisher is based on the principle of editorial independence. According to the written agreement between the editors and the publisher, all decisions of the editors are independent of the publisher and the journal owner. Editors should reject incomplete and inaccurate research that does not comply with the journal policy, publication rules and level without any influence.

• Confidentiality: Editors do not share information about a submitted article with anyone other than the responsible author, referees and editorial board. It ensures that the articles evaluated by at least two referees are evaluated according to the double-blind refereeing system and keeps the referees confidential.

• Information Flows and Disagreements: Editors and editorial board members do not use unpublished information in a submitted article for their own research purposes without the express written consent of the authors. Editors should not have a conflict of interest regarding the articles they accept or reject.

• Publishing Decision: Editors ensure that all articles accepted for publication are subject to peer-review by at least two referees who are experts in their field. Editors are responsible for deciding which work will be published from the articles submitted to the journal, the validity of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, comments by referees and similar legal requirements. Editors have the responsibility and authority to accept or reject articles. Therefore, he has to use his responsibility and authority appropriately and on time.

• Ethical Concerns: Editors will take action when ethical concerns arise regarding a submitted article or published article. As a matter of fact, they continue their processes without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards. Any reported unethical publishing behavior will be investigated, even if it occurs years after publication. Editors follow COPE Flowcharts should ethical concerns arise. If ethical issues are significant, correction, withdrawal can be applied or concerns can be published in the journal.

• Collaboration with Journal Boards: Editors ensure that all members of the advisory committee advance processes in accordance with editorial policies and guidelines. They inform the members of the advisory board about the publication policies. Advisory board members provide independent evaluation of studies. They can contribute to new advisory board members and make decisions accordingly. It should submit studies appropriate to the expertise of advisory board members for evaluation. Editors interact with the Advisory Board on a regular basis. They hold regular meetings with the editorial board for editorial policies and journal development.

b) Responsibilities of Authors

1. Standards for Reporting: The authors of the original research should ensure that the work performed and the results are presented accurately, followed by an objective discussion of the importance of the work. The article proposal should contain sufficient details and references.

2. Data Access and Retention: Authors are required to retain the raw data of their work. When required, they should submit it for editorial review if requested by the journal.

3. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must submit entirely original works, and if they have used the work or words of others, this must be properly cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. For this reason, a similarity rate report is requested from all authors who submit articles to the journal.

4. Multiple, duplicate, redundant or simultaneous submissions / publications: Authors should not submit a previously published article in another journal for consideration. Submitting an article to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

5. Authorship of the Article: Only people who fulfill the criteria for authorship should be listed as authors in the content of the manuscript. These authorship criteria are as follows; (i) contributed to the design, implementation, data collection or analysis phases (ii) prepared or made significant intellectual contribution or critically revised the manuscript, or (iii) saw the final version of the manuscript, approved it, and agreed to submit it for publication. The corresponding author must ensure that all authors (according to the definition above) are included in the list of authors and must declare that they have seen the final version of the article and agree to submit it for publication.

6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Authors should disclose conflicts of interest at the earliest possible stage (usually by providing a disclosure form at the time of article submission and by including a statement in the article). All sources of financial support for the study must be declared (including the grant/funding number or other reference number, if applicable).

7. Peer Review: Authors are required to participate in the peer review process and are responsible for fully cooperating by responding promptly to editors' requests for raw data, disclosures and evidence of ethical approval and copyright permissions. If a "required revision" decision is made first, authors should review and resubmit their manuscripts by the systematic deadline for reviewers' comments.

8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: When authors find significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they are obliged to immediately notify the Journal editors or Publishers and cooperate with the journal editors or publishers to correct a typographical error (erratum) on the article or remove the article from publication. If the editors or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a material error or inaccuracy, they must take the responsibility of the author to promptly correct or retract the article or provide proof of the accuracy of the paper to the journal's editors.

c) Responsibilities of the Referees

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Assists editors in editorial decisions and assists authors in improving their articles through editorial communication. It should be pointed out that other articles, works, sources, citations, rules and similar deficiencies related to the article should be completed.

2. Evaluation Quickness: Any referee who does not feel qualified to review the manuscript proposal or who knows that the manuscript review will not occur in a timely manner should immediately notify the editors and reject the invitation to review, thus ensuring that new referees are appointed.

3. Confidentiality: All article suggestions submitted for review are confidential and should be treated as such. It should not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor. This also applies to referees who decline an invitation to review.

4. Standards of Impartiality: Comments on the article proposal should be made impartially and suggestions should be made in a way that the authors can use to improve the article. Neither personal  nor biased criticisms of the authors is not appropriate.

5. Acceptance of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published works not cited by the authors. The referee should also notify the editor of any significant similarity of the reviewed article and any other article (published or unpublished).

6. Conflicts of Interest: Conflicts of interest should be reported to the editor. There should be no conflict of interest between the referees and the stakeholders of the article that is the subject of evaluation.