In sinecine: Journal of Film Studies, the editor is responsible for the process of publishing or rejecting every manuscript submitted to the journal. The editor has the authority to decide whether a manuscript will be sent for peer review or rejected without being sent to reviewers. When making decisions regarding the publication process, consultation with members of the Editorial Board and the Advisory Board may take place when deemed necessary.

Editors and reviewers evaluate manuscripts submitted to the journal for publication solely on the basis of academic quality, scholarly merit, and publication criteria. The evaluation process is based on the principle of impartiality; manuscripts are considered without regard to the authors’ race, religion, language, ethnic origin, gender, political or other views, property, seniority, academic title, or institutional affiliation.

It is essential that any situations that may constitute a conflict of interest during the publication process be explicitly declared. If, in manuscripts submitted to the journal, any party involved in the publication process (author, reviewer, or editor) has a conflict of interest that may affect the submission, evaluation, editorial decisions, or communication between the parties, this situation must be clearly stated. Authors, reviewers, and editors share mutual responsibility in this regard.

The journal does not provide any guarantees and accepts no responsibility regarding the characteristics or descriptions of commercial products mentioned in published articles for advertising or promotional purposes. If there is a direct or indirect commercial connection in the article, or if there is an institution providing financial support for the study, authors are required to clearly declare this situation and state whether there is any conflict of interest.

Except for the editor and assistant editors, members of the Editorial Board and the Advisory Board do not have information about the identity of the authors. These individuals do not share information about the manuscripts communicated to them with third parties. When deemed necessary, members of the Editorial Board may be informed by the editor.

If previously published quotations, texts, tables, images, or similar materials are used in an article, the author(s) are obliged to obtain written permission from the relevant copyright holders and to clearly indicate this in the manuscript. Responsibility for obtaining the necessary permissions rests entirely with the author(s). Legal permissions must be obtained for all copyrighted images used in articles; the journal cannot be held responsible for any copyright violations arising from such use.

Compliance of manuscripts with scientific and ethical principles, the accuracy of the content, and the legal responsibility for the materials used rest with the author(s).

sinecine: Journal of Film Studies employs a double-blind peer review method for all original research articles submitted for peer evaluation, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed (i.e., authors and reviewers do not see or know each other’s names). Therefore, the confidentiality of reviewer and author identities is essential.

In order to maintain the integrity of the review process, authors are required to anonymize their manuscripts before submitting them for peer review. In this context, institutional affiliations, expressions that reveal personal references to previous work (e.g., “in our previous article”), acknowledgements, and similar elements that may disclose the author’s identity must be removed from the text.

The editor explicitly informs reviewers that manuscripts sent to them for review are the intellectual property of the authors and that the process constitutes confidential and privileged academic communication. Reviewers and members of the Editorial Board may not publicly discuss manuscripts under review, may not copy them for personal use, and may not share them with third parties without the editor’s permission. Reviewer reports may not be published or disclosed without the consent of both the author and the editor. Particular care is taken to ensure the confidentiality of reviewers’ identities. When deemed necessary, reviewer reports may, by editorial decision, be anonymized and shared with other reviewers evaluating the same manuscript.

Each research article submitted to the journal is first subject to an editorial pre-evaluation by the editor(s). At this stage, manuscripts that fall outside the journal’s aims and scope, are inadequate in terms of Turkish or English language and expression, contain serious scientific inaccuracies, lack original contribution, or are not compatible with the journal’s publication policies may be rejected without being sent for peer review. Rejected manuscripts may not be resubmitted to sinecine: Journal of Film Studies (even with minor revisions or a change of title). The editor may, when deemed appropriate, request revisions from the author before sending the manuscript to reviewers.

Manuscripts that pass the pre-evaluation stage are sent to at least two external reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. If one reviewer provides a negative evaluation, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer. A manuscript is published if at least two of the three reviewers submit positive evaluations; otherwise, the manuscript is rejected and removed from the publication process. If one reviewer recommends rejection and another recommends major revisions, the editor reserves the right to reject the manuscript directly.

Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within 30 days. When deemed necessary, reviewers may request more than one round of revisions. Reviewer selection is based on expertise and areas of interest; the author’s academic title or hierarchical position is not a determining factor in the evaluation process. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers hold a doctoral degree in their field.

Reviews, book and film review essays, field notes, ethnographic writings, and translations are not considered primary research articles and are therefore not subject to mandatory external peer review. Such texts undergo editorial review in terms of academic quality, accuracy of content, conformity with the journal’s scope, and publication ethics. The editors reserve the right to send these texts for peer review when deemed necessary.

sinecine: Journal of Film Studies is responsible for ensuring that the publication process of all submissions is conducted independently, impartially, and in accordance with ethical principles. In cases where any conflict of interest related to the submission or evaluation of a manuscript exists among authors, reviewers, or editors, this situation must be reported to the editor.

All research articles submitted to the journal are subjected to plagiarism/similarity checks using appropriate software. Any issues identified are reported to the Editorial Board. Based on the similarity report, the Editorial Board may request revisions from the authors or reject the manuscript.

sinecine: Journal of Film Studies undertakes to fulfill its ethical duties and responsibilities by adhering to the Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive as well as the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the COPE Guidelines on Good Publication Practice published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE); it also expects authors and reviewers to act in accordance with this ethical framework. In the examination and management of ethical misconduct, the step-by-step guidelines set out in the COPE Flowcharts are taken as the basis.

Authors submitting manuscripts to sinecine: Journal of Film Studies are expected to comply with the ethical principles and responsibilities outlined below:

Authors acknowledge that the works they submit to the journal are original. In cases where other works are used or quotations are made, it is mandatory to provide complete and accurate references to the sources used.

Individuals who have not made an intellectual contribution to the preparation of a study should not be listed as authors. Authorship requires a direct and meaningful academic contribution to the work.

In all manuscripts submitted for publication, any existing or potential situations and relationships that may constitute a conflict of interest must be clearly declared.

Within the scope of the evaluation process, authors may be requested by the editorial team to provide raw data related to the manuscript when deemed necessary. In such cases, authors must be prepared to submit the relevant data and information to the editor, the Editorial Board, and the Scientific Board.

Authors acknowledge that they hold the rights to use the data, documents, and materials employed in their studies and that they have obtained the necessary permissions related to the research and analysis processes. For studies involving participants, relevant ethics committee approvals and legal permissions must have been obtained. In cases where these conditions are not met, the evaluation process of the manuscript may be terminated or the submission may be rejected.

Authors are obliged to immediately inform the journal editor or publisher if they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in a published article, an article available in early view, or a manuscript under evaluation. In such cases, authors are expected to cooperate with the editor in correction or retraction processes.

Authors may not submit their manuscripts to more than one journal simultaneously or keep them under concurrent evaluation. If a manuscript has been published in another journal or is under evaluation elsewhere, it may not be submitted to sinecine: Journal of Film Studies.

Requests to change authorship information (such as adding an author, changing the order of authors, or removing an author) are not accepted once the evaluation process has begun.

The evaluation process of all manuscripts submitted to sinecine: Journal of Film Studies is conducted through a double-blind peer review method. Reviewers do not have access to the identities of the authors and may not communicate with them directly. All correspondence related to the evaluation process, including review forms and referee reports, is conveyed to the author(s) by the editor through the journal’s management system.

Within this framework, reviewers who evaluate manuscripts for sinecine: Journal of Film Studies are expected to comply with the following ethical principles and responsibilities:

Reviewers should agree to evaluate only those manuscripts that are directly related to their field of expertise.

Reviewers must conduct the evaluation process in accordance with the principles of impartiality and confidentiality. Information and documents obtained during the review process must be kept confidential and must not be shared with third parties.

If reviewers become aware of, or suspect, a conflict of interest during the evaluation process, they should decline to review the manuscript and inform the journal editor accordingly.

In accordance with the principle of confidentiality, reviewers should not retain or use the manuscripts they have reviewed after the evaluation process is completed. Only the final published versions of the reviewed works may be used for academic purposes after publication.

Reviewers should base their evaluations solely on the academic content, scientific quality, and methodological coherence of the manuscript. Factors such as the authors’ nationality, gender, religious beliefs, political views, or commercial interests must not influence the evaluation process.

Reviewer reports must be prepared in a constructive, respectful, and academic tone. Expressions that are demeaning, personal, aggressive, offensive, sarcastic, or insulting must not be used.

If reviewers accept the evaluation assignment, they are obliged to complete their reports within the specified time frame and to act in accordance with the ethical responsibilities outlined above.

Reviewers may communicate with the editor and exchange views on matters related to the evaluation process when deemed necessary.

sinecine: Journal of Film Studies editors and assistant editors fulfill their duties and responsibilities in accordance with the ethical principles and publication policies adopted by the journal, by adhering to the Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive as well as the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the COPE Guidelines on Good Publication Practice published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Editors are responsible for all content published in sinecine: Journal of Film Studies. Within this scope of responsibility, editors fulfill the following duties and obligations:

Editors consider the informational needs of readers and authors; they carefully evaluate questions, requests, and complaints submitted by authors, reviewers, or readers and are obliged to respond in a clear, informative, and timely manner.

Editors carry out activities aimed at ensuring the continuous development of the journal and seek to strengthen its academic quality.

They plan and implement editorial processes intended to enhance the academic quality of the works published in the journal.

Editors support freedom of thought and expression and ensure that diverse academic views and approaches are represented within the framework of scholarly standards.

Maintaining the academic coherence and publication integrity of the journal is among the fundamental responsibilities of the editors.

Editors conduct editorial processes in compliance with intellectual property rights and ethical standards and do not permit practices that contradict these principles.

In cases requiring correction, clarification, or retraction, editors adhere to the principle of editorial transparency and inform the Editorial Board when deemed necessary.

Editors ensure the effective and consistent implementation of the double-blind peer review method set forth in the journal’s publication policy. In this context, they are responsible for ensuring that each submission undergoes a fair, impartial, and timely evaluation process.

Editors make positive or negative decisions regarding manuscripts submitted to the journal based on the academic significance, originality, validity, clarity of presentation, and the aims and objectives of the journal.

Manuscripts that fall within the scope of the journal and do not present serious problems are taken into the preliminary evaluation process by the editors.

Editors take into consideration and do not disregard positive evaluations and recommendations provided by reviewers, unless there is a serious issue concerning the manuscript.

Newly appointed editors make an effort not to alter decisions previously made by former editor(s) regarding manuscripts, unless a serious problem is identified.

Editors provide authors with clear, explanatory, and informative feedback regarding the evaluation process.

Editors are responsible for the protection of the personal data of authors, reviewers, and readers and ensure the confidentiality of such data.

Editors consider persuasive criticisms regarding works published in the journal and adopt a constructive approach toward such criticisms. The author(s) of the criticized work are granted the right to respond.

The editorial process continues until the publication of the manuscript. During this process, editors may request additional revisions from authors up to the final stage, in addition to the revisions indicated in the reviewers’ reports.

The duties and responsibilities of editors toward reviewers are defined within the following principles and practices:

Editors select reviewers based on areas of expertise that are appropriate to the subject and scope of the manuscript under evaluation.

Editors are responsible for providing reviewers with the information, guidelines, and instructions they may need during the review process.

Editors monitor whether there is any conflict of interest between authors and reviewers and take the necessary measures where required.

In accordance with the principle of blind peer review, reviewers’ identity information is kept confidential, and the disclosure of such information to third parties is not permitted.

Editors encourage reviewers to evaluate manuscripts using an impartial, scholarly, and objective approach.

Editors assess reviewers in accordance with criteria such as timely responses during the review process and overall performance.

Editors develop practices and policies aimed at improving the effectiveness and quality of reviewers’ evaluation processes.

Editors take the necessary steps to ensure that the reviewer pool remains current, dynamic, and broad in scope.

Editors prevent discourteous, unscientific, or non-constructive evaluations from being incorporated into the review process.

Editors ensure that the reviewer pool represents a wide range of expertise and perspectives.

Editors ensure that errors, inconsistencies, or misleading judgments identified during the evaluation process are corrected promptly and effectively.

Editors regularly inform members of the Editorial Board about the journal’s publication policies and keep them informed of developments within the journal. Newly appointed Editorial Board members are informed about the publication policies, and the necessary information and guidance required for them to fulfill their duties are provided by the editors.

Within this framework, editors:

Editors ensure that Editorial Board members evaluate works in an impartial and independent manner.

Editors ensure that Editorial Board members are selected from among individuals who are qualified to make academic contributions to the journal and who possess appropriate areas of expertise.

Editors assign Editorial Board members manuscripts for evaluation that correspond to their fields of expertise.

Editors maintain regular communication with the Editorial Board and provide the necessary information regarding the operation of the journal.

Meetings are held with the Editorial Board at regular intervals for the purpose of reviewing the journal’s publication policies and assessing the journal’s academic development.

Special issues and dossier topics, as well as thematic headings, are determined by the Editorial Board.