Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Responsibilities of Authors
The authors of the original research paper should present the importance of the work being done. The basic data should be shown correctly in the article. The article should contain enough detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Dishonesty or knowingly false statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Authors may be asked to provide raw data of their work with the article for editorial review, and they must be prepared to make the data available to the public if applicable.
Authors will submit original or review articles and cite other works as appropriate. Publications that are effective in determining the nature of the article should also be mentioned.
In general, articles describing the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Submitting the same article to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Articles published elsewhere as copyrighted material may not be submitted.
Anyone who has made significant contributions should be listed as a co-author. The corresponding author ensures that all contributing co-authors are present and that no persons who have never joined the list of authors are added. The corresponding author also confirms that all co-authors approve the final version of the article and agree to its submission for publication.
When the author discovers that there has been a significant error or inaccuracy in his published work, he is under the obligation to notify the journal editor or publisher immediately and to cooperate with the editor to withdraw or correct the article.
Issues to be Considered by The Authors
Ensure that all submitted research is original, fully referenced and that all authors are properly represented.
Provide accurate contact information for a designated author, who is deemed to be fully responsible for the authorship of the article and all communications relating to the moral status and authenticity of the article.
Provide the source of all data and third-party material, including previously unpublished work by the authors. Any elements that may compromise the authenticity of the presentation should be explicitly avoided and / or discussed with the editor's office in the first place.
Identify the contribution of any third party they intend to include in their article and obtain written permission from the respective copyright holders for reuse in each case. These permissions must be submitted when the article is accepted or when minor changes require acceptance.
Co-operate if articles found to be unethical, misleading or harmful are published incorrectly, along with retraction. Stay in good contact with the editor(s), publisher and other authors.
Please also consider the following principles.
1. The journal publishes scientific articles in the research and review category, which are original written in the English language. The original articles are expected to have qualities such as the knowledge produced is new, to suggest a new method, or to give a new dimension to the knowledge that existed before.
2. In our journal, letters to the editor, discussions and case presentations are not included in the type of publications.
3. Articles that are suitable for evaluation in terms of writing and publishing principles are directed to referees. At least two referees are appointed for the evaluation of each article that passes the approval of the editor.
4. In our journal, blind refereeing is applied in article evaluations. The names of the referees who evaluate the articles are not reported to the authors. Referees are also allowed to evaluate articles without seeing the names of the authors.
5. Articles submitted to referees are expected to be evaluated within 15 days. In case this period is exceeded, the editor gives an additional 15 days by reminding the referee. If this period is exceeded, the editor appoints a new referee and withdraws the request from the old referee.
6. The article that receives at least two positive referee reports from the article evaluation is entitled to be published. If the referee receives a positive and negative umpire report, the post is sent to two more umpires. The final decision on the article is made by the editors.
7. The decision of acceptance and rejection of the article is made by the editors. A major (resubmit for evaluation) or minor (revision required) revision decision is made to develop articles that are not deemed sufficient by the recommendations of the referees. Articles that do not reach the desired level and are not considered scientifically sufficient are rejected.
8. The required corrections must be made within 20 days at the latest. Otherwise, the article is rejected.
9. Articles submitted for publication must not be published anywhere or submitted to any journal for publication.
10. All responsibility for the articles rests with the respective authors. Articles must be prepared by an internationally recognized code of science ethics by checking with plagiarism detection software to check their authenticity before being submitted. The plagiarism detection rate is expected to not exceed 25%. Where necessary, a copy of the Ethics Committee report should be included.
11. Articles submitted for publication in our journal should be prepared according to the journal article writing format. Otherwise, the article is rejected.
12. Articles submitted to NATURENGS for publication do not charge any evaluation or application fee.

Responsibilities of Editors
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal to be published. The editor evaluates the articles without taking into account the authors ' races, genders, sexual orientations, religious beliefs, ethnicities, citizenship, or political philosophies. The decision will be based on the importance, originality and clarity of the article, as well as its relevance to the validity of the work and the scope of the journal. Existing legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism should also be considered.
The editor and any journal officer should not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the respective author, referees, potential referees, other editorial consultants, or publisher.
Unpublished materials described in a submitted article will not be used by the editor or editorial board members for their research purposes without the author's express written permission.

Responsibilities of Referees
The peer-review process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and can also serve the author in the development of the article.
Any referee who is not qualified to review the research reported in an article or who cannot immediately look at it must notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
Articles submitted for review should be considered confidential documents. It should not be shared or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.
Comments should be made objectively. Referees must express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Referees must determine cases, where the relevant published work referred to in the article, is not mentioned in the reference section. They must specify whether observations or discussions from other publications accompany relevant sources. The referees shall inform the editor that there is a significant similarity or overlap between the evaluated article and other published articles with personal information.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept secret and not used for personal advantage. Referees should not take into account articles that are competitive, collaborative or have conflicts of interest arising from their association with other authors, institutions or institutions affiliated with newspapers.


These principles are based on the directive on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics of Higher Education Institutions and the principles set by the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) for Editors and Authors.