Publication Ethics Statement

A double-blind peer review system is adopted in article evaluation processes. Thus, it is ensured that the authors and referees are anonymous.
Sinefilozofi journal has adopted the policy of providing open access, it is not for profit and access to the journal content is free. The journal does not charge article processing or application fees.
Sinefilozofi journal does not reserve the publication rights of the articles. All publication rights belong to the authors. However, articles published in the journal cannot be used without reference.
Sinefilozofi undertakes to fulfill its ethical responsibilities on the basis of the standards set by the "Council of Higher Education Scientific Research and Publication Ethics" standards and "COPE"; makes sure that editors, authors and referees are also aware of these responsibilities in scientific articles sent to journals.
Sinefilozofi journal also takes into account the publication ethics flow charts (https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts) determined by COPE in case of a possible abuse or violation of publication ethics.

Research Ethics

- Journal of SineFilozofi embarks on high international standards in research ethics. It is the responsibility of the authors to ensure the compliance of their studies with ethical rules.
- Researchers should initially place emphasis on the principle of transparency, originality and consistency in all processes involving the design, preparation and implementation of the research.
- In research involving human element; participants in the research should volunteer in participating and they should be asked to fill out a voluntary consent form.
- In cases where children and people under guardianship are included in the research, the consent of their legal guardians should be obtained.
- If the study will be carried out in any institution or organization, a certificate of approval for the research must be obtained from the relevant institution or organization.
- Studies involving human elements should have an Ethics Committee Permission document and researchers should state that they have it in their studies. 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. In addition, in case reports, information regarding the signature in the consent form should be included on one of the first/last pages of the article.
- Researchers must attach importance to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
- In addition to all these items, within the scope of "Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive" (https://www.yok.gov.tr/Sayfalar/Kurumsal/mevzuat/bilimsel-arastirma-ve-etik-yonetmeligi.aspx) and scientific Actions against research and publication ethics are as follows:

Actions Contrary to Scientific Research and Publication Ethics

Article 4 - (1) Actions against scientific research and publication ethics are as follows:

a) Plagiarism: To present the original ideas, methods, data or works of others as one's own work, in whole or in part, without attribution in accordance with scientific rules,
b) Fraud: Using non-existent or falsified data in scientific research,
c) Distortion: To falsify research records or obtained data, 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 organizations that receive support,
d) Republishing: presenting duplicate publications as separate publications for academic appointments and promotions,
e) Slicing: Presenting the results of a study as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions by dissecting the results of a research in a way that violates the integrity of the research and publishing it in more than one issue,
f) Unfair authorship: Including people who do not contribute actively 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/her influence to include his/her name among the authors, although he/she did not have an active contribution,

(2) Other types of ethical violations include:
a) Not mentioning the names of the supporting persons, institutions or organizations and their contributions in the publications carried out with these actors’ 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) Violating the provisions of the relevant legislation in human biomedical research and other clinical research,
e) Sharing the information in a particular work during the reviewing process with others without the permission of the author before the research has been published,
f) Misuse of resources, places, facilities and devices provided or allocated for scientific research,
g) To allege unfounded, out-of-place and deliberate ethical violations
h) To publish the data obtained without the consent of the participants in surveys and attitude studies conducted within the scope of a scientific study or without the permission of the institution on the condition that the research is conducted with the help of an institution,
i) Harming animal health and ecological balance in research and experiments,
j) Not obtaining written permissions from authorized units before starting studies in research and experiments,
k) Carrying out studies in research and experiments contrary to the provisions of the legislation or international conventions to which Turkey is a party, regarding 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

The Ethical Responsibilities of the Authors

Scientific articles to be sent to the journal cannot have been published before, included in a program, or undergone an evaluation process for publication elsewhere. Authors cannot have their work in the application process of more than one journal at the same time.
The author should have documentation showing that he/she has the rights to use the data used, the necessary permissions for the analysis, or has performed the permission procedures for the experimental subjects.
Ethics committee approval should be obtained for research that requires ethics committee approval, and this approval should be stated and documented in the article.
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. In addition, in case reports, information regarding the signature in the consent form should be included on one of the first/last pages of the article.
Manuscripts submitted to the journal must be original. Attention should be paid to citation and bibliography.
The names of all authors who contributed to the article should be included. All authors have to indicate the author rank on the Journal of SineFilozofi Copyright and Author Agreement form. Authors should indicate the Researchers’ Contribution Rate Statement. In addition, they should declare financial relations, conflicts of interest and competition of interest, if any, that may affect the results of the research or scientific evaluation.
The editorial team of the journal should be contacted about the errors noticed after the publication of the articles and necessary arrangements should be made.
If necessary, copyrights should be obtained by the author for the images used in the articles.
It is not possible to change the author responsibilities of a work whose evaluation process has begun (such as adding an author, changing the order of authors, removing an author).
The authors are ultimately responsible for situations such as material errors and possible ethical problems that may arise in the content of the articles.

Ethical Responsibilities of Referees

All information about the article being evaluated should be kept confidential. Statements, information and negotiations about these articles should not be made in different media. The documents containing the peer review process should not be shared outside the journal editorial team.
Evaluation processes should be conducted fairly. The principle of neutrality must be observed. Referees should not have conflicts of interest related to the research, with the authors and/or, if any, with the financial backers of the research.
If there is any doubt on a conflict of interest in the evaluation process, the editor of the journal should be informed. Furthermore, the referee should refuse to carry on the peer-review process of the work.
Referees should evaluate the articles within the given period of time and should not disrupt the process of the article by exceeding this time.
The evaluation process of the articles should be carried out in collaboration with the editor. The referee should convey the warnings and additional information he/she deems appropriate to the editor.

Evaluation reports should not include offensive or derogatory expressions.
Corrections requested from the author should be clearly stated.

Authorities and Ethical Responsibilities of the Editorial Team

The editor-in-chief has the authority to decide whether or not to assess a manuscript during the preliminary review phase.
Editors are responsible for applying the "Blind Refereeing and Evaluation Process" policies in the journal's publication policies. In this context, the editors ensure that the evaluation process of each work is carried out in a fair, unbiased and timely manner.
Editors are responsible for protecting the personal information of authors, referees and readers.
Editors are obliged to examine complaints from authors, referees or readers and respond in an enlightening and explanatory manner.
Editors are obliged to provide explanatory information regarding questions from authors, referees or readers.

Publication Policy


SineFilozofi is an refereed (double-blind refereeing system), widespread, periodical electronic journal published twice a year. The journal, which has an interdisciplinary structure between the fields of cinema and philosophy, aims to provide ground for international academic debates in its field.

There is no application fee for academic content submitted for publication to the journal. This journal has adopted an open access policy, it is not for profit, and access to the journal content is free.

Scientific articles sent to the journal for publication must be in Turkish or English. The journal publishes original research, compilations, case reports, book reviews and interviews/interview articles coming from branches such as fine arts, philosophy and social sciences, which are closely related to this field, especially the intersection of cinema and philosophy, and which coincide with the publication policy.

SineFilozofi works on a voluntary basis. There is no royalty fee for the articles, book and film reviews, and conversations / interviews published in the content of the magazine. Manuscripts submitted to the journal must not have been published elsewhere or sent for publication.

Only one article of an author can be published in the same year. Even if the author submits another article and the article is accepted, it is queued for publication in an appropriate issue in the following year.

Sinefilozofi undertakes to fulfill its ethical responsibilities on the basis of the standards set by the "Council of Higher Education Scientific Research and Publication Ethics" standards and "COPE"; makes sure that editors, authors and referees are also aware of these responsibilities in scientific articles sent to journal. Sinefilozofi journal also takes into account the publication ethics flow charts (https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts) determined by COPE in case of a possible abuse or violation of publication ethics.

Sinefilozofi journal does not reserve the publication rights of the articles. All publication rights belong to the authors. However, articles published in the journal cannot be used without reference. Scientific articles to be sent to the journal should not have been previously published, included in a program, or entered into the evaluation process for publication elsewhere. Authors cannot have their work in the application process of more than one journal at the same time.


Blind Review Process and Evaluation Policy

Scientific articles sent to the journal that have not been published before, that have not been included in a program or that have not entered the evaluation process for publication elsewhere are accepted and included in the evaluation process. Authors are required to submit a plagiarism report, along with their manuscript, that has been screened for plagiarism using Turnitin or iThenticate software and shows that their work has a similarity rate of less than 20%. Manuscripts that pass this stage are primarily taken into the preliminary evaluation process by the editor-in-chief. The editor-in-chief has the authority to decide whether or not to assess a manuscript during the preliminary review phase. Manuscripts that complete the preliminary review phase are sent to at least two national/international referees for evaluation by the editor-in-chief in accordance with the double-blind refereeing policy. The publication decision is made by the editor-in-chief after the arrangements made by the authors in line with the requests of the referees and the referee process.

*The Responsibilities of Editors and Referees

The editor-in-chief has the authority to decide whether or not to assess a manuscript during the preliminary review phase. The editor-in-chief does not allow any conflict of interest between the authors, editors and referees for the articles to be evaluated. The editor-in-chief and editors are responsible for applying the double-blind refereeing policies. The editor-in-chief and editors are responsible for applying the double-blind refereeing policies. . In this context, the editors ensure that the evaluation process of each work is carried out in a fair, unbiased and timely manner.

Editors are responsible for protecting the personal information of authors, referees and readers.
Editors are responsible for protecting the personal information of authors, referees and readers.
Editors are obliged to examine complaints from authors, referees or readers and respond in an enlightening and explanatory manner.
All information about the article being evaluated should be kept confidential. Statements, information and negotiations about these articles should not be made in different media.
Documents containing the refereeing process should not be shared outside of the journal’s editorial team.
Evaluation processes should be conducted fairly. The principle of neutrality must be observed.
Referees should evaluate the articles within the given period of time and should not disrupt the process of the article by exceeding this time.
The evaluation process of the articles should be carried out in collaboration with the editor. The referee should convey the warnings and additional information he/she deems appropriate to the editor.
Evaluation reports should not include offensive or derogatory expressions.
Corrections requested from the author should be clearly stated.
Referees should not have conflicts of interest related to the research, with the authors and/or, if any, with the financial backers of the research.
If there is any doubt on a conflict of interest in the evaluation process, the editor of the journal should be informed. Furthermore, the referee should refuse to carry on the peer-review process of the work.

*Referee Process

Manuscripts submitted to the journal cannot have been published elsewhere or sent for publication. Works published in the journal cannot be used without being cited. Manuscripts sent to the journal are evaluated with a double-blind refereeing system. The editor-in-chief makes the assignments of the work in accordance with the principle of not allowing conflict of interest between authors, editors and referees. Studies are sent to at least two referees in parallel to double-blind refereeing system. The referees are expected to conduct the evaluation processes fairly and to comply with the principle of impartiality. Referees must keep all information about the evaluated manuscript confidential. They shouldn’t make any statements and give information about the articles in different media. Evaluation reports should not include offensive or derogatory expressions. If there is any doubt on a conflict of interest in the evaluation process, the editor of the journal should be informed. Furthermore, the referee should refuse to carry on the peer-review process of the work.

If both referees who accept the evaluation give positive reports about the study, it can be published, if they are both negative, the study is rejected. If there is a positive and a negative report from the referees, a third referee is contacted. The study is accepted or rejected in accordance with the report of the third arbitrator. As a result of these reviews and evaluations, the author(s) of the study may be asked for changes and/or corrections. Studies that have not completed the peer review process will be evaluated for the next issue. The publication decision is made by the editor-in-chief after the arrangements made by the authors and the referee process in accordance with the requests of the referees.