The publication process at Furniture and Wooden Material Research Journal is the basis of the objective and respectful improvement and dissemination of information. Therefore, the procedures in this process improve the quality of the studies. Peer-reviewed studies support and materialize the scientific method. At this point, all parties included in the publication process (authors, readers and researchers, publisher, reviewers, and editors) must comply with the standards of ethical considerations. Furniture and Wooden Material Research Journal expects all parties to hold the following ethical responsibilities.

The following ethical duties, responsibilities, and best practices are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guide and policies.

Editors of the Furniture and Wooden Material Research Journal are accountable for everything published. This means the editors should
• strive to meet the needs of readers and authors.
• strive to improve their journal constantly;
• have processes in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish;
• champion freedom of expression;
• maintain the integrity of the academic record;
• preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards;
• be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.

Best practice for editors would include

• actively seeking the views of authors, readers, reviewers, and editorial board members about ways of improving their journal’s processes

• encouraging and being aware of research into peer review and publishing and reassessing their journal’s processes in the light of new findings

• working to persuade their publisher to provide appropriate resources and guidance from experts (e.g. designers, lawyers)

• supporting initiatives designed to reduce research and publication misconduct

• supporting initiatives to educate researchers about publication ethics

• assessing the effects of their journal policies on author and reviewer behavior and revising policies, as required, to encourage responsible behavior and discourage misconduct

• ensuring that any press releases issued by their journal reflect the message of the reported article and put it into context

• Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the paper’s importance,

• originality, clarity, and the study’s validity and relevance to the journal's remit.

• Editors should not reverse decisions to accept submissions unless serious problems are identified with the submission.

• New editors should not overturn decisions to publish submissions made by the previous editor unless serious problems are identified.

• A description of peer review processes should be published, and editors should be ready to justify any important deviation from the described processes.

• Journals should have a declared mechanism for authors to appeal against editorial decisions.

• Editors should publish guidance to authors on everything that is expected of them. This guidance should be regularly updated and should refer or link to this code.

• Editors should guide criteria for authorship and/or who should be listed as a contributor following the standards within the relevant field.

• The submitted manuscript should not be submitted to multiple journals for simultaneous consideration.

• The submitted work should be original and not have been published elsewhere in any form or language unless the new work concerns expanding previous work.

• Results should be presented clearly and honestly without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation.

• No data, text, or theories by others are presented as if they were the author’s own. Proper acknowledgments to other works must be given; quotation marks are used for verbatim copying of material, and permissions must be secured for copyrighted material.

• The submitting corresponding author is responsible for ensuring all the other coauthors approve the manuscript article's publication.

• All authors have agreed to allow the corresponding author to serve as the correspondent with the editorial office to review the edited manuscript and proof.

• Plagiarism in any form constitutes a serious violation of publication ethics and is unacceptable. The journal has a strict policy against plagiarism and misconduct.

• All submitted manuscripts are checked for plagiarism using professional plagiarism-checking software (iThenticate).

• When necessary, articles will be retracted according to COPE retraction guidelines.

• Reviewers assist the editorial board in making editorial decisions. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them to improve the paper.

• Reviewers should not consider manuscripts with conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

• Reporting possible research misconduct.

• Suggest alternative reviewers if they cannot review the manuscript for any reason.

• Treating the manuscript as a confidential document.

• Ensuring that the manuscript is of high quality and original research.

• Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. The relevant citation should accompany references to the ideas of others.

• The reviewer should not force Authors to cite the reviewer's published articles.

All original research papers involving humans, animals, plants, biological material, protected or non-public datasets, collections, or sites must include a written statement under an Ethics Approval section, including the following:

• The name of the ethics committee(s) or institutional review board(s) involved.

• The number or ID of the ethics approval(s).

• A statement that human participants have provided informed consent before participating in the research.

• Research involving animals must adhere to ethical standards concerning animal welfare. All original research papers involving animals must:

• Follow international, national, and institutional guidelines for the humane treatment of animals.

Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the editorial board members for research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.

Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, the author must notify the journal editor or publisher promptly and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper in the form of an erratum.

PUBLICATION POLICY
1. Copyright Transfer principles: All authors must sign the form. It is mandatory to have the signature of the corresponding author on the form. In case the signatures of the other author/authors cannot be reached due to inaccessibility, the correspondence author accepts the responsibility of the related author/authors. The submitted article must not be published elsewhere or under review in any journal for publication. All authors mentioned in the article have seen and approved the submitted article. The journal is not responsible for problems such as the order of names that may occur between authors. The article has been prepared in accordance with the spelling rules specified by the journal. As the author(s) of the article, we accept that we have waived the article's copyright, transferred this right to the Furniture and Wooden Material Research Journal, and authorized Furniture and Wooden Material Research Journal to publish the article. Article author(s) accept that all texts, figures, graphics, photographs, and charts given in the article belong to the authors of the article and that any information received from other researchers is made by citing the source within the framework of ethical rules, and that the author(s) of the article is responsible for any issue that constitutes an ethical crime.

2. Furniture and Wooden Material Research Journal has agreed to comply with the COPE Code of Conduct provisions for Journal Editors. All journal-related activities are to be carried out according to these rules.

3. The journal publishes two annual issues and does not publish special issues or additional issues.

4. Furniture and Wooden Material Research Journal is an international, peer-reviewed, and open-access journal that does not charge an article processing fee, evaluation fee, printing fee, or any other fee for articles.

6. Personal information such as names, e-mail addresses, and telephone numbers entered in the management system of Furniture and Wood Materials Research Journal will only be used for the scientific purposes of this journal, in accordance with the Privacy Statement.

7. All articles published in Furniture and Wooden Material Research Journal are archived and stored in pdf format through TÜBİTAK-ULAKBİM, Life Sciences Database.

8. Furniture and Wooden Materials Research Journal does not accept advertisements.

9. Furniture and Wooden Material Research Journal evaluates with a double-blind peer review process.

10. The articles sent to the Furniture and Wooden Material Research Journal are first evaluated by the editor-in-chief. Articles not suitable for the scope of the journal are rejected at this stage.

11. If the articles suit the journal's scope, a referee review is started if there is no significant deficiency. The refereeing invitation period is 1 week, and the referee evaluation period is 2 weeks. The authors are given a minimum of 1 week and a maximum of 4 weeks to make the necessary corrections to the article in line with the opinions of the referees. A minimum of 1 day and a maximum of 7 days is given for the final control phase.

12. If the articles sent to the Furniture and Wooden Material Research Journal have passed the preliminary evaluation stage and have been sent to the referees, they cannot withdraw the article.

13. Each article sent to the journal is reviewed by two referees. If both referees give a positive opinion, the article is accepted. If both referees agree on the negative opinion, the article is rejected. If one of the referees gives a positive opinion and the other a negative opinion, the opinion of a third referee is sought. A decision is made about the articles sent to the journal at the end of three months at the latest.
14. The articles sent to the journal are examined with the iThenticate program for plagiarism.