ETHICAL PRINCIPLES and PUBLICATION POLICY
PUBLICATION ETHICS
The publication processes of Academic Review of Economics and Administrative Sciences constitute the foundation for the impartial and reputable development and dissemination of knowledge. Accordingly, these processes directly reflect the quality of the work of authors and the institutions supporting them. Peer-reviewed studies are those that embody and support the scientific method. At this point, it is important that all stakeholders in the process (authors, readers and researchers, publisher, reviewers, and editors) comply with ethical standards. Within the scope of publication ethics, Academic Review of Economics and Administrative Sciences expects all stakeholders to bear the following ethical responsibilities. iThenticate or Turnitin may be used for ethical auditing and preventing unethical practices.
The ethical duties and responsibilities outlined below have been prepared in accordance with the guidelines and policies published openly by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS
Authors submitting study to Academic Review of Economics and Administrative Sciences are expected to comply with the following ethical responsibilities:
- Submitted studies must be original. If authors benefit from or use other studies, they must properly and completely cite and/or quote them.
- Individual(s) who did not intellectually contribute to the content should not be listed as author(s).
- Any potential conflicts of interest and relationships must be disclosed.
- Authors may be asked to provide raw data during the evaluation process; in such cases, they must be prepared to present the requested data and information to the editorial board.
- Authors must have documentation showing that they have the rights to use the data, obtained necessary permissions for research/analysis, or received consent from participants involved in experiments.
- If authors detect an error or mistake in their published, early view, or under-review work, they are obliged to inform the editor or publisher and cooperate in correction or retraction processes.
- Authors cannot submit the same work to multiple journals simultaneously. A new submission can only begin after the previous process is completed. Work published elsewhere cannot be submitted to Academic Review of Economics and Administrative Sciences.
- Changes in authorship (such as adding/removing authors or changing author order) cannot be proposed after the evaluation process has begun.
ETHICAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF EDITORS
Editors of Academic Review of Economics and Administrative Sciences must adhere to the ethical duties and responsibilities based on COPE’s “Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.”
General Duties and Responsibilities
Editors are responsible for every publication in the journal. Accordingly, they must:
- Meet the information needs of readers and authors,
- Ensure continuous development of the journal,
- Improve the quality of published works,
- Support freedom of thought,
- Ensure academic integrity,
- Maintain ethical standards and intellectual property rights,
- Provide transparency in matters requiring correction or clarification.
Relations with Readers
Editors should consider the needs of readers, researchers, and practitioners, ensuring that publications contribute to the literature and are original. They must also provide clear and informative feedback.
Relations with Authors
- Decisions should be based on originality, importance, clarity, and relevance to the journal.
- Suitable submissions should proceed to preliminary evaluation unless there are serious issues.
- Positive reviewer recommendations should not be ignored without strong justification.
- Previous editorial decisions should not be changed without serious reason.
- Blind peer review processes must be enforced and deviations prevented.
- A clear and updated “Author Guide” should be provided.
- Feedback must be clear and informative.
Relations with Reviewers
- Reviewers should be selected according to expertise.
- Necessary guidance and information must be provided.
- Conflicts of interest must be monitored.
- Reviewer identities must remain confidential (blind review).
- Reviewers should be encouraged to evaluate objectively and scientifically.
- Reviewer performance should be monitored and improved.
- The reviewer pool should be continuously updated and diversified.
- Unprofessional or non-scientific reviews must be prevented.
Relations with Editorial Board
Editors must ensure that board members follow policies, stay informed, and are trained. They should:
- Ensure impartial evaluation,
- Select qualified members,
- Assign work according to expertise,
- Maintain regular communication and meetings.
Relations with Publisher
The relationship is based on editorial independence.
Editorial and Blind Review Processes
Editors must ensure fair, unbiased, and timely evaluation of all submissions.
Quality Assurance
Editors are responsible for ensuring that all published content meets journal policies and international standards.
Protection of Personal Data
Editors must protect personal data of participants and reject studies lacking documented consent.
Ethics Committee, Human and Animal Rights
Editors must ensure ethical approval and necessary permissions; otherwise, submissions must be rejected.
Prevention of Misconduct
Editors must investigate and address allegations of misconduct objectively and transparently.
Ensuring Academic Integrity
Errors or misleading information must be corrected promptly.
Protection of Intellectual Property
Editors must safeguard intellectual property rights and prevent violations.
Constructiveness and Openness to Discussion
- Constructive criticism should be welcomed.
- Authors should be given the right to respond.
- Studies with negative results should not be excluded.
Complaints
Editors must carefully examine and respond to complaints from stakeholders.
Political and Commercial Concerns
No external political or commercial factors should influence editorial decisions.
Conflicts of Interest
Editors must ensure impartial handling of conflicts of interest.
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
The evaluation of all submissions through “Blind Peer Review” directly affects the quality of publication. This process ensures trust through objective and independent assessment. The evaluation process of the Academic Review of Economics and Administrative Sciences is conducted according to the principle of double-blind peer review.
Reviewers cannot communicate directly with authors; all evaluations and comments are transmitted through the journal management system. In this process, reviewer comments on evaluation forms and full texts are conveyed to the author(s) via the editor. In this context, reviewers evaluating submissions for Academic Review of Economics and Administrative Sciences are expected to fulfill the following ethical responsibilities:
- They should only accept to review studies within their field of expertise.
- They must conduct evaluations impartially and maintain confidentiality.
- If they believe there is a conflict of interest during the evaluation process, they must refuse to review the study and inform the journal editor.
- In accordance with confidentiality principles, they must destroy the manuscripts they review after the evaluation process.
- They may only use the final versions of the studies after publication.
- Evaluations must be objective and based solely on the content of the study; nationality, gender, religious beliefs, political views, or commercial concerns must not influence the evaluation.
- Reviews should be written in a constructive and polite manner; reviewers must avoid hostile, defamatory, or insulting personal comments.
- They must complete the evaluation of accepted assignments on time and in accordance with the ethical responsibilities outlined above.
Ethical Responsibilities of The Publisher
Niğde Ömer Halisdemir University, the publisher of Academic Review of Economics and Administrative Sciences, is a non-profit public university. In this context, it acts with awareness of the following ethical responsibilities:
- Editors are responsible for all processes related to the works submitted to OHUIIBFD. In this framework, decision-makers are the editors, regardless of economic or political gains.
- The publisher is committed to ensuring independent editorial decision-making.
- It is responsible for taking all necessary measures against scientific misconduct, citation manipulation, and plagiarism involving editors.
In case of encountering an unethical situation
If you encounter any unethical behavior or content in the Acedemic Review of Economics and Administrative Sciences -whether related to the ethical responsibilities mentioned above or otherwise-
please report it via email to ohuiibfdergisi@gmail.com
