Open Access Policy

Seatific Journal is an open access publication.

All content published in the journal is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 International License which allows third parties to use the content for non-commercial purposes as long as they give credit to the original work. This license allows for the content to be shared and adapted for non-commercial purposes, promoting the dissemination and use of the research published in the journal.

All published content is available online, free of charge at https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/seatific.

Copyright Policy

A Copyright Agreement, which includes an Acknowledgement of Authorship, must be submitted with all manuscripts. Authors, by signing this agreement, consent that if their article is accepted for publication by Seatific Journal, it will be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). This license permits third parties to share and adapt the content for non-commercial purposes, provided they appropriately credit the original work. Authors must obtain permission from copyright holders to use any previously published material such as figures, tables, or any other content in both print and electronic formats. Authors bear the legal, financial, and criminal liabilities related to copyright infringement. The copyright of their work published in the Seatific Journal remains with the authors.

Authors retain the copyright and commercial rights of their published work in the Seatific Journal.

Self-Archiving Policy

Authors retain the right to self-archive their work on their institutional or personal websites, as well as in open access repositories, after publication. It is expected that authors will appropriately acknowledge the original publication and include the DOI number when sharing their articles. Additionally, authors are requested to provide a link from the deposited version to the URL of the publisher's website. This requirement ensures that the online published version on the publisher's website is recognized as the definitive version of record, maintaining the integrity and authenticity of the scientific record.

Publication Fee Policy

The Seatific Journal is funded by Yıldız Technical University. Authors are not required to pay any fees during the evaluation and publication process.

Peer Review Process

Manuscripts submitted to Seatific Journal will go through a double-anonymized peer review process where both authors and reviewers are anonymous to each other. Each submission will be reviewed by at least two external, independent peer reviewers, who are experts in their fields, in order to ensure an unbiased evaluation process.

Submissions will first go through a technical evaluation process during which the editorial office staff will ensure that the manuscript is prepared and submitted in accordance with the journal’s guidelines.

Submissions that do not conform to the journal’s guidelines will be returned to the authors with requests for technical corrections.

Submissions that conform to the journal’s guidelines will be assigned to the Editor in Chief, who will assess each submission’s suitability to the journal in terms of scope and quality. Submissions that are not suitable for the journal can be rejected at this stage.

For papers that are suitable for the journal, the Editor in Chief will work with Associate Editors, who will recruit reviewers for the manuscript. Once assigned, Associate Editors can decide to reject a manuscript, continue with the peer review process, or request revisions before further peer review.

Associate Editors will submit their recommendations, which are based on reports submitted by the reviewers, to the Editor in Chief. Revised manuscripts will be reassessed by the Associate Editors, who will aim to work with the original reviewers to make a new recommendation.

The Editor in Chief is the final authority in the decision-making process for all submissions.

In the event of delays, authors will be informed of the reason for the delay and given the opportunity to withdraw their manuscript.

Once the peer review process is completed, the authors will receive anonymous peer review reports along with the editorial decision on their manuscript. Peer review reports will not be posted publicly in any medium. The submitted material is considered confidential and must not be used in any way until after its publication. If it is suspected that a reviewer has appropriated an author’s ideas or data, the Editorial Board will handle the matter in accordance with the relevant COPE guideline.

Authors can recommend peer reviewers during submission. The handling editor is the sole authority to decide whether or not recommended peer reviewers will be invited to evaluate the manuscript.

Peer reviewers are required to adhere to the principles of COPE's Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, and these guidelines provide a framework for reviewers to follow in order to ensure the integrity and fairness of the peer review process. The Editorial Board follows COPE’s relevant flowchart to minimize peer review manipulation. If there is suspicion of peer review manipulation after publication, the Editorial Board will follow the appropriate flowchart of COPE.

Potential peer reviewers should inform the Editor of any possible conflicts of interest before accepting an invitation to review a manuscript. Informing the editor of any potential conflicts of interest allows them to make an informed decision about whether or not to invite the potential reviewer to participate in the review process. It also helps to ensure the integrity and transparency of the review process.

Communications between Editors and peer reviewers contain confidential information that should not be shared with third parties.

To ensure an equitable peer review process, Seatific Journal will recruit external editors for manuscripts submitted by the Journal’s editorial board members. External editors will be selected based on academic qualifications and peer review experience. We uphold the confidentiality of external editors and reviewers to preserve impartiality. Reviewers and external editors are asked to disclose any potential conflicts of interest, promoting transparency and a reliable evaluation process.

Revisions

Authors of manuscripts requiring either a “minor revision” or a “major revision” will receive a decision letter from the Editor in Chief. This letter will include the suggestions of the reviewers and editors along with a deadline for submitting the revised and updated manuscript.

When submitting a revised version of a paper, authors must include a detailed “Response to the Reviewers” that addresses each issue raised by the reviewers point by point, indicating where in the manuscript the changes have been made (each reviewer’s comment is followed by the author’s reply and the line numbers where changes have been implemented), as well as an annotated copy of the main document.

Revised manuscripts must be submitted within the timeframe specified in the decision letter. If the revised manuscript is not submitted within this period, the option to revise may be withdrawn. If authors require additional time, they should request an extension before the initial deadline expires.

Publication Ethics

The Seatific Journal is committed to adhering to the guidelines and core practices set forth by several organizations, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (a joint statement by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA). These guidelines are designed to promote transparency, integrity, and best practices in scholarly publishing. Adherence to these standards ensures that the research published by the journal is of high quality and meets the ethical standards of the scientific community.

Authors are encouraged to use the EASE Ethics Checklist for Authors to ensure their manuscripts comply with ethical standards.

Plagiarism and Ethical Misconduct

All submissions are screened multiple times during the peer-review and/or production processes using similarity detection software (Crossref Similarity Check powered by iThenticate).

When discussing work by others (or your own previous work), ensure that you correctly cite the material in every instance.

Authors are strongly advised to avoid any form of plagiarism and ethical misconduct, which include but are not limited to:

Citation Manipulation: The practice of artificially inflating citation counts through methods such as excessive self-citation, excessive citation of articles from the same journal, or the inclusion of honorary or stacked citations.

Self-Plagiarism (Text-Recycling): The practice of reusing sections or sentences from one's previous publications without proper citation. This is considered plagiarism as it involves using previously published work without proper attribution.

Salami Slicing: The unethical practice of dividing one significant piece of research into several smaller parts and publishing them as separate articles, which can mislead regarding the novelty and significance of the research.

Data Fabrication: Adding data that never occurred in the gathering of data or experiments. This is considered a serious form of research misconduct, presenting false information as real.

Data Manipulation/Falsification: Altering research data to misrepresent the research findings. This includes manipulating images, omitting inconvenient results, changing data points, etc., and is considered a form of research misconduct.

In the event of alleged or suspected research misconduct, such as plagiarism, citation manipulation, or data falsification/fabrication, the Editorial Board will follow the appropriate COPE flowcharts to ensure that the allegations or suspicions are handled in a fair, transparent, and consistent manner.

Authorship

Being an author of a scientific article primarily indicates a person who has made a significant contribution to the article and shares responsibility and accountability for that article. To be recognized as an author of a scientific article, researchers should meet the following criteria:

• Making a significant contribution to the work in one or more of the following phases: research conception or design, acquisition of data, analysis, and interpretation.
• Drafting, writing, or revising the manuscript.
• Agreeing on the final version of the manuscript and the journal to which it will be submitted.
• Taking responsibility and accountability for the content of the article.

Contributions not included in the authorship criteria should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgment section.

In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work they have conducted, authors should also be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for other specific parts of the work. This ensures that all authors' contributions are accurately and appropriately acknowledged. Authors may use the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) to provide information about individual contributions at the time of submission. It is expected that all authors agree on their individual contributions as communicated by the corresponding author. The authors’ contribution statement will be published with the final article and should accurately reflect contributions to the work.

Furthermore, authors should have confidence in the integrity of their co-authors' contributions. This means trusting that their co-authors have conducted the research ethically and responsibly, and that the data and results presented in the manuscript are accurate and reliable.

Individuals who do not meet all four of the authorship criteria should not be listed as authors on the manuscript. However, they can be acknowledged on the title page of the manuscript for their contributions to the research. This recognizes the contributions of these individuals and provides transparency about who was involved in the research.

If the editorial board suspects a case of ghost, honorary, or gift authorship, the submission will be suspended, and the relevant COPE flowchart and COPE Policy on authorship and contributorship will be followed.

Change of Authorship

Any requests for changes to authorship, such as the removal or addition of authors, or changes in the order of authors, should be submitted to the editorial office along with a letter stating the reasons for the change. This letter must be signed by all authors, including any who are to be removed.

The journal’s Editorial Board will handle all requests for changes to authorship in a consistent and transparent manner, following the relevant COPE flowchart guidelines. These procedures are in place to protect the integrity of the research and the reputation of all involved authors.

Declaration of Interests

Authors must disclose any relationships or interests that could inappropriately influence or bias their work. This disclosure should be made through the online submission system while submitting their manuscript.

The Seatific Journal also requires and encourages individuals involved in the peer review process of submitted manuscripts to disclose any existing or potential competing interests that might lead to potential bias.

The Editorial Board will handle cases of potential competing interests of editors, authors, or reviewers in accordance with the relevant COPE flowcharts.

Financial Disclosure

Seatific Journal requires authors to disclose any financial support they received to conduct their research. This information should be included in the funding statement, which must be provided when the manuscript is submitted to the journal.

The funding statement should include the names of any granting agencies, the grant numbers, and a description of each funder's role in the research. If the funder had no role in the research, this should also be stated in the funding statement. This information is crucial for readers to understand the potential biases and conflicts of interest that may exist in the research.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Manuscript Preparation

Seatific Journal adheres to the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding the use of AI and AI-assisted technology in manuscript preparation. Authorship involves tasks that can only be performed by humans. Authors are responsible for ensuring the originality of the article and possessing the necessary qualifications for authorship. While AI can be used for language corrections during the writing process, this usage should be explicitly stated in the article. AI cannot be included as an author because it is crucial to maintain the originality and quality of the article.

Post-Publication Corrections and Ethical Misconduct Handling

All requests for post-publication corrections are subject to editorial review. The editorial board will assess the request to determine whether a correction is necessary and appropriate. The decision to issue a correction will be based on the nature of the error, its potential impact on the article, and the availability of supporting evidence. The editorial board may consult with the authors, reviewers, and other experts as needed to make an informed decision. If a correction request is approved, the article will be corrected in the journal's archive.

The Editorial Board reviews cases in accordance with journal policies and COPE guidelines.

If allegations of misconduct are reported directly by whistleblowers, the Editorial Board will follow the relevant COPE flowchart. The journal will act in accordance with COPE's flowchart on how to respond to whistleblowers when concerns about a published article are raised on a social media site.

In some instances, an ombudsperson may be appointed to resolve claims that cannot be settled internally.

To investigate potential ethical misconduct more efficiently and effectively, the editorial board may share information with other editors-in-chief. If communication with the editor-in-chief is necessary, the editorial board will adhere to the relevant COPE recommendations.

If necessary, the journal may also contact institutions to inform them of suspected misconduct by researchers and provide evidence to support these concerns, following COPE guidelines throughout the process.

In the event of ethical misconduct concerns, the editors will conduct an investigation according to COPE guidelines. Should the investigation confirm the concern, the editors may issue a retraction notice. This notice will be published in the journal, and the article's record will be updated to reflect the retraction. Although retracted, the article will remain in the journal's archives but will be clearly marked as retracted. Additionally, the article's record will be updated in relevant indexes to reflect the retraction.

Appeals and Complaint

The editorial board of the journal is responsible for addressing appeals and complaints in accordance with the guidelines and recommendations of the COPE. If an author has an appeal or complaint, they should contact the editorial office directly to discuss their concerns. The editorial board will review the case and make a decision based on COPE guidelines.

The editor-in-chief has the final authority in the decision-making process for all appeals and complaints. In some cases, an ombudsperson may be assigned to resolve claims that cannot be resolved internally. It is important to note that the journal follows a fair and transparent process for handling appeals and complaints, with the goal of preserving the integrity of the scientific record.

Withdrawal Requests

Withdrawal requests for an article are reviewed by the editorial board of the journal. To request the withdrawal of an article, authors must send a letter signed by all co-authors stating their request and the reasons for withdrawal to the journal editor. The editorial board will then review the request and make a decision based on the reasons provided by the authors. If the request is approved, the article will be withdrawn from the journal, and the authors will be notified of the decision. Authors are advised not to submit their work to another journal for evaluation until the withdrawal request has been approved, to avoid any potential conflicts of interest or duplication of publication.

Preprint Policy

Seatific Journal does not consider preprints as prior publication, allowing authors to present and discuss their findings on a non-commercial preprint server before submitting their work to the journal.

However, authors must inform the journal of the preprint server deposition of their article, along with its DOI, during the initial submission process.

If the article is accepted and published in the journal, it is the responsibility of the authors to update the archived preprint and link it to the published version of the article. This ensures that readers can easily access the most up-to-date and accurate information.

Permission Policy

The journal’s content is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). Under this license, users are allowed to share, adapt, reproduce, and distribute the journal’s content for non-commercial purposes, provided that they give appropriate credit to the original author and the journal.

Disclaimer

The statements or opinions expressed in the manuscripts published in the journal reflect the views of the author(s) and not those of the editors, editorial board, or publisher. The editors, editorial board, and publisher are not responsible for the content of the manuscripts and do not necessarily endorse the views expressed within them. It is the responsibility of the authors to ensure that their work is accurate and well-researched. The views expressed are their own. The editors, editorial board, and publisher provide a platform for the authors to share their work with the scientific community.