Publication Ethics and Publication Misconduct Statement

Ethical Principles and Publication Policy
Our publication ethics and publication policy statement has been prepared based on the “Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors” (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011). 

Duties of Editors and Editorial Board
Impartiality and Editorial Independence
Editors evaluate submitted articles solely on their academic merits (importance, originality, validity of the work, clarity) and relevance to the scope of the journal, without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation of the authors. The editor has full authority over all editorial content of the journal and the timing of its publication.

Confidentiality
Editors and journal staff may not share any information about a submitted article with anyone other than the corresponding author, referees, potential referees, other assistant editors and the publisher.

Declaration and Conflicts of Interest
Editors and editorial board members may not use unpublished information contained in a submitted article for their own research purposes without the express written permission of the authors. Privileged information or ideas gained by editors as a result of reviewing the article are kept confidential and may not be used for personal gain. Editors refrain from reviewing articles if they have any conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative or other relationships/affiliations with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the submitted articles. Instead, they request another member of the editorial board to review the article.

Publication Decisions
Editors ensure that all submitted articles are peer-reviewed by at least two expert referees in the field. The Editor and Editorial Board are responsible for deciding which articles to publish based on the validity of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the comments of the referees, applicable legal requirements regarding copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may consult with other editors or referees in making this decision.

Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and supports authors’ papers through editorial communications with authors. Peer review is a fundamental component of formal scientific communication and is central to scientific work.

Punctuality
If a person invited to review a paper feels inadequate to review the research or does not think that he/she will be able to complete and submit his/her review within the allotted time, he/she should promptly inform the editors and decline the review invitation so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and should be treated as such. They should not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor (which they will do only in exceptional and special cases). This also applies to reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Standards of Objectivity
Evaluations should be conducted objectively and observations should be clearly formulated with supporting arguments that authors can use to improve the paper. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.

Citation of Sources
Reviewers should identify published work that has not been cited in the submitted article. Any observations, derivatives, or opinions that have appeared in previous publications should be presented with the relevant citation. Referees should also notify editors of any significant similarity or overlap between the paper they are reviewing and any other paper (published or unpublished).

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
An invited reviewer should immediately notify editors of any conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/affiliations with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the paper, and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Unpublished material contained in a submitted article may not be used by a reviewer in their own research without the express written permission of the authors. Privileged information or ideas gained through review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer's personal advantage. This also applies to those who decline the invitation to review.

Authors’ Duties

Reporting Standards
Authors of original research should provide an accurate description of the work and results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The paper should include sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective, and comprehensive, with editorial ‘views’ or perspectives clearly defined. Fraudulent or deliberate misrepresentation constitutes unethical conduct and is unacceptable.

The materials of copyright (e.g. tables, figures and long citations) should be used with necessary permission and special thanks. The works of other authors and contributors or the sources utilised should be used appropriately and stated in the references. The manuscripts sent to the e-journal is subjected to double blind peer review process by one editor and at least two referees. Plagiarism, duplication, false/ denied authorship, research/data fabrication, article slicing, publication by slicing, copyright infringement and concealment of the conflict of interests are accepted as unethical behaviours. The articles not eligible for the accepted standards are removed from the publication process. The articles which are detected to be illegal and including inconveniencies after the publication are also involved.

Data Access and Storage
Authors may be asked to provide raw data from their work with their paper for editorial review, and authors should be prepared to make the data publicly available if possible. In all cases, authors should ensure that such data are accessible to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication, provided that the confidentiality of participants and legal rights to proprietary data are protected.

Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written and submitted entirely original work, and that they have appropriately cited the work and/or words of others if they have used them. The publications that were influential in determining the quality of the work reported in the article should also be cited. Plagiarism can take many forms, from “passing” someone else’s article as the author’s own article to copying, paraphrasing, or using results from research conducted by others (without attribution). All forms of plagiarism constitute unethical publishing behavior and are unacceptable.

Multiple, Duplicate, Unnecessary, or Simultaneous Submissions/Publication
Articles describing the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Therefore, authors should not submit for review an article that has already been published in another journal. Submitting an article to more than one journal at the same time is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Publication of certain types of articles (such as clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal may be justified in some cases, provided that certain conditions are met. Authors and editors of the relevant journals should accept secondary publication, which should reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference text must be cited in the secondary publication.

Authorship of the Article
Only individuals who meet the following authorship criteria should be listed as authors on the article, as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, conduct, data collection, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) prepared the draft or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) viewed and approved the final version of the article and accepted its submission for publication. The order of authors cannot be changed after the article has been submitted for review. Authors cannot be added/deleted from the article. Individuals who made significant contributions to the work reported in the article (such as technical assistance, writing and editing assistance, general support) but do not meet the authorship criteria should not be listed as authors. They should be named in the acknowledgments section of the article, provided that written consent is obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (as defined above) are included in the author list and that inappropriate co-authors are not included, and should verify that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to submit it for publication.

Declaration and Conflicts of Interest
Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest that could influence the results or their interpretation of the article at the earliest possible stage (in the declaration form, together with the application and in one sentence in the article). Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial, such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, memberships, employment, consultancies, stock ownership or other equity interests, and paid expert testimony or patents, as well as non-financial, such as licensing arrangements, personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge, or knowledge related to the subject matter or materials discussed in the article. All sources of financial support for the work (grant number or other reference number, if applicable) should be disclosed.

Citation of Sources
Authors should ensure that they appropriately cite other relevant work and also cite publications that are influential in determining the nature of the work reported. Information obtained privately (from interviews, correspondence or discussions with third parties) may not be used or reported without express written permission from the relevant source. Authors are prohibited from using information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as peer review of articles or grant applications, in the course of providing such services.

Peer Review
Authors are obliged to participate in and cooperate fully with the peer review process by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, evidence of disclosure and ethical approval, patient consents, and copyright permissions. In the event of an initial “revision” decision, authors must systematically respond to reviewers’ comments in a timely manner, item by item, and resubmit their articles to the journal with revisions by the deadline.

Major Errors in Published Work
Authors are obliged to promptly notify the journal editors or publisher of any significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work and cooperate with them to correct the article in the form of a typographical/typographical error or to retract the article. If the editors or publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, the authors are obliged to promptly correct or retract the relevant article or provide evidence to the journal editors that the article is correct.

Disclaimer
Editors and the editorial board are not responsible for the content of the article published in the journal and the ideas and opinions expressed by the authors. The originality of the articles, their editing and the responsibility for any errors are entirely the responsibility of the authors. All articles submitted for review and publication in Trakya University Journal of Social Sciences are subject to double-blind peer review for originality, ethical issues and useful contributions. The decisions of the referees are the sole means for the publication of an article in the journal and are final.

References
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March 7). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors; http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf

Editorial and Referee Evaluation Process
1-Preliminary review of the article by the editorial secretariat
2-Editorial Board control
3-Control of the Main Article File's compliance with the Journal Format
4-Similarity Report (İthenticate) evaluation
5-Commitment Form review
6-Referee invitation to initiate the referee evaluation process
7-Notification to the author in accordance with the referee evaluation reports
8-Control of the revised article from the author and forwarding it to the referees
9-Notification of the second evaluation result of the referees to the author
10-Sending of the final version of the article by the author
11-Receipt of the final plagiarism and similarity report (İthenticate) by the editor
12-Completion of the Article Evaluation Process
13-Final approval of the article, which has been typeset and layout, from the author retrieval
14-Obtainment of DOI number
15-Publication/ Queuing for publication

Open Access Policy
Trakya University Journal of Social Sciences adopts the principle that making scientific research freely available to the public will increase the global sharing of knowledge, and provides immediate open access to its content.

Archiving
Trakya University Journal of Social Sciences uses the LOCKSS archiving system.