Publication Ethics
TÜBA-AR Journal aims to adhere to the ethical principles and standards recommended by various organizations, such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, the guidelines published by the Council of Science Editors (CSE) regarding the responsibilities and ethical obligations of editors working in peer-reviewed journals, the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME joint statement), and the Higher Education Council's Regulations on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics. These standards have been developed to support ethical behavior, transparency, and responsible publishing in the academic community. The journal aims to meet the ethical expectations of the scientific community by complying with these standards, ensuring that published research meets high academic integrity standards, and maintaining objectivity and impartiality in the publication process while minimizing conflicts. Author(s), reviewers, and editors are key partners in upholding these principles and contribute to the advancement of knowledge and the preservation of cultural heritage.

The journal addresses various aspects of cultural heritage in the light of scientific methods. Applications in this context focus on documentation, inventorying, and oral history studies of cultural heritage of different scales and qualities, such as representations, narratives, information, skills, and cultural spaces. Commitment to ethical behavior ensures the journal's credibility and contributes to the advancement of knowledge in the field of cultural inventory.

Publication Board
The journal's Publication Board meets at least twice a year. The members of the Editorial Board accept the journal's publication ethics principles and policies; they also evaluate decisions related to these principles and policies. The Editorial Board determines the journal's thematic topics and selects individuals to propose thematic editorships for relevant themes. It also makes recommendations for members of the journal's Scientific Board and offers suggestions to increase the journal's national and international recognition.

The Editorial Board is responsible for informing the journal's Editorial Committee in cases where there is suspicion of a violation of scientific publication ethics (such as abuse, plagiarism, conflict of interest, copyright infringement) in order to clarify the situation. It also submits indexing proposals to increase the journal's international visibility and academic quality. Author(s), reviewers, and editors are encouraged to stay informed about emerging ethical issues and to engage in continuous professional development. They should also disclose any conflicts of interest that may affect the research or review process.

Editorial Board
Articles submitted to the journal are evaluated by editors regardless of the authors' race, ethnicity, gender, worldview, and beliefs. They provide detailed and constructive evaluations of the articles reviewed by the referees. Members of the Editorial Board do not usually publish in the journal. In the event of such a situation, the text of the person on the Editorial Board is subject to a rigorous and impartial peer review process. Submitted articles are subject to the same review as other articles to ensure fairness, transparency, and high publishing standards.

In articles entering the review process, the author acts as the liaison between the reviewers and editors. They conduct the peer review process with academic courtesy, meticulously documenting each stage from the date the article reaches the journal to the publication stage. Regarding the review process, they do not hesitate to account for the review steps for each article (subject to respecting the personal rights of the author and reviewer and the journal's confidentiality principles). If editors have a conflict of interest or relationships that could lead to a conflict of interest, they must clearly state this and withdraw from their editorial duties. The Editorial Board should not use information obtained from a reviewed article for personal gain. They will not accept articles that have been submitted to another journal at the same time. Corrections, retractions, and clarifications must be made immediately in cases of error or misconduct.

If editors identify an error in a published article that invalidates the work or significant portions of it, or that involves plagiarism or unethical conduct, they may retract the article. In the event of a retraction, editors should publish a statement explaining that the article has been retracted and the reason for the retraction. In addition, a link should be provided connecting the original article and the retracted version so that all readers can easily access this information on online platforms.

Author(s)
The journal adheres to authorship criteria to maintain the reliability and integrity of published scientific studies. Eligibility for authorship depends on making significant contributions to the concept, design, execution, or interpretation of the research study. Author(s) are expected to actively participate in the preparation of the draft or critical review of the article and to collectively approve the final version before submission. Public accountability for the accuracy and originality of the work is an important consideration that ensures the accountability of each author.

The journal encourages the acknowledgment of individuals who did not meet the authorship criteria but still contributed to the article in the acknowledgments section. Any disagreement or concern regarding authorship is addressed immediately by the Editorial Board. The journal publishes studies that use advanced scientific research methods and techniques consistent with the journal's subject matter and scope. In addition to methodological competence, studies must make original and new contributions to the field as a basic publishing criterion. Author(s) are expected to present original and authentic work, correctly attributing the contributions of others. Plagiarism, fabrication, and falsification are strictly prohibited. Appropriate acknowledgment must be given to all contributors. Ghostwriting and guest authorship are unacceptable.

Detailed information on the comprehensive principles and responsibilities related to the authorship process can be found on the Authorship Criteria page.

Reviewers
In the review process, all works submitted to the journal are evaluated using the double-blind peer review method. First, the Editorial Board conducts a technical and formal preliminary review. Articles that are found to be suitable are sent to at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. The reviewers submit their constructive and scientifically based evaluations within the specified time frame. The editor makes a decision to “accept,” “require minor/major revisions,” or “reject” based on the referee reports. During the revision process, the author(s) are required to respond to the referee comments item by item. Impartiality and confidentiality are fundamental throughout the process. The author(s) do not know the identities of the referees. The reviewers also do not know the author(s) of the work they are evaluating.

If reviewers believe they cannot provide a fair and impartial evaluation, they should report this. If there is a work that is very similar to the one they are preparing or evaluating, they should decline the evaluation. Reviewers should inform the Editorial Board if they notice a conflict of interest during the evaluation. All manuscripts and referee evaluations must be kept confidential. Referees should avoid personal comments directed at the author. They should be specific in their criticism. Referees should not communicate directly with the author(s) without informing the journal. Referees should not suggest citations to increase their own or their colleagues' citation counts.

Reviewers should continue to maintain the confidentiality of the work after the review. They should respond to requests from the journal regarding revisions and re-evaluations. The peer review process is very important for maintaining the quality of scientific publications.

Detailed information on the comprehensive principles and responsibilities related to the review process can be found on the Reviewer Guide page.

Ethical Principles and Publication Policy
Ethics Committee Approval and Informed Consent
All submitted articles must indicate whether ethics committee approval and/or any other legal or institutional permission is required. In cases where ethical approval is required, the author(s) must share the name of the approving institution, the date of approval, and the decision number.

For clinical studies, a document proving ethics committee approval must be submitted at the time of submission. If ethics approval is not required for a study, the author(s) must provide a valid explanation. In the absence of an ethics approval document, COPE guidelines will be applied.

The author(s) must respect the privacy and confidentiality of individuals involved in the research. Written consent must be obtained from participants, and it must be clearly stated that their data may be used. For participants under the age of 18, permission must be obtained from a parent or legal guardian. Personal identification information must be kept confidential unless explicit permission for its use has been obtained. Author(s) must adhere to ethical standards in research, including humane treatment of subjects, appropriate use of data, and compliance with relevant regulations and guidelines. Ethical approval must be obtained for research involving human or animal subjects and clearly stated in the article. Transparency in reporting is necessary to build trust within the scientific community.

The author(s) are responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of participants and keeping their names confidential, especially when using photographs and other identifiable materials. The necessary consent forms must be signed and retained. The consent of the participants must be clearly stated in the Methods section of the study.

Plagiarism and Ethical Violations
All articles submitted to the journal are subject to various checks throughout the peer review and publication processes, primarily using plagiarism detection software (iThenticate by CrossCheck). If the similarity report exceeds the 20% limit, excluding references (sources), the article is returned to the author(s). Reviewers are responsible for informing editors if they detect plagiarism in the articles sent to them for review.

Author(s) must ensure that all sources are properly cited. Even if cited, reproducing text, tables, and images as if they were original work is considered plagiarism. Simply adding a source to the bibliography does not eliminate the responsibility of academic integrity.

Author(s) are advised to avoid all instances of plagiarism and unethical practices listed below:
Citation Manipulation: The use of various methods by author(s) to intentionally increase the number of citations for a particular author, journal, or publishing group. These practices may include frequently citing their own work, excessively quoting articles published in the same journal, adding unnecessary or unjustified citations, or systematically creating large clusters of citations.
Self-plagiarism: This is when author(s) reuse sections or phrases from their previously published works without properly citing the source. Even if the author is the same person, this still counts as plagiarism because they're reusing content that's already been published without giving credit.
Salami Publishing: This involves publishing the same research data set in multiple articles by dividing it into small pieces. This method is considered unethical because it involves transforming the same research, conducted with the same hypothesis, sample, and methods, into multiple publications.
Data Fabrication: This involves presenting data that has not actually been collected or obtained in experiments as if it were part of the study. This constitutes a serious ethical violation as it means producing misleading information in scientific studies.
Data Manipulation/Falsification: This involves altering or presenting research data in a way that distorts the research findings. This includes practices such as digitally altering visual materials, removing inconsistent results, or deleting or altering data that is deemed inappropriate. Such manipulations are considered research misconduct because they cause false information to be conveyed as if it were true.

Publication Fee Policy
The journal is funded by TÜBA. Author(s) do not pay any fees during the review and publication process.

Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Detailed information on comprehensive principles and responsibilities regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence for author(s), editors, and reviewers can be found on the Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy page.