ETHICAL PRINCIPLES AND PUBLICATION POLICY [English]

Temâşâ Journal of Philosophy (ISSN: 2148-371X, e-ISSN: 2651-5148) has adopted a zero-tolerance policy on plagiarism. Before the evaluation process starts, the author(s) should upload the plagiarism report of the article scanned by plagiarism programs such as “iThenticate”, “Turnitin” to the system. After the work file and plagiarism report are uploaded to the system, the evaluation process will be started. The plagiarism report rate of the articles should not be more than 20 percent. Articles with a plagiarism report of more than 20 percent will be rejected or the author will be asked to correct for the work.

It is primarily the responsibility of the authors to check the originality of the articles sent to Temaşa Philosophy Journal. Articles that do not comply with research and publication ethics or that have a risk of plagiarism are not evaluated.

Responsibility for the studies published in the journal in terms of science and language rests with the authors. In this regard, Temaşa Philosophy Journal, Editorial Board, Editorial Board and Secretariat cannot be held responsible. The ethical and legal responsibility of the studies belongs to the author(s). The above-mentioned rules are deemed to have been accepted by all authors who have applied for the article.

The following ethical duties and responsibilities are written in the light of the guide and policies made by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

https://publicationethics.org/ 

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, and the publisher. 

1. Authorship

The bibliography list should be complete.
Plagiarism and fake data should not be included.
The same research should not be attempted to be published in more than one journal, and it should comply with scientific research and publication ethics.
Actions against science research and publication ethics are as follows:

a) Plagiarism: Presenting the ideas, methods, data, practices, writings, figures or works of others as their own work, in whole or in part, without attribution in accordance with scientific rules,

b) Fraud: To produce data that is not based on research, to edit or change the presented or published work based on untrue data, to report or publish them, to make unfinished research appear as if it has been done,

c) To falsify research records and obtained data, to present methods, devices and materials that are not used in the research as if they were used, not to evaluate the data that are not suitable for the research hypothesis, to manipulate the data and/or results in order to fit the relevant theory or assumptions, to falsify or shape the research results in line with the interests of the people and organizations supported,

d) Republishing: To present more than one work containing the same results of a research as separate works in associate professor examination evaluations and academic promotions,

e) Slicing: Presenting the results of a research as separate works in the evaluations of associate professorship exams and in academic promotions, by breaking the integrity of the research, into parts inappropriately, and by making multiple publications without citing each other,

f) Unfair authorship: Including non-active contributors among authors, not to include people with active contributions among the authors, to change the order of authors without justification and inappropriately, to remove the names of those who contributed actively from the work at the time of publication or in subsequent editions, to include their names among the authors by using their influence, although they do not have an active contribution,

g) Other types of ethical violations: Not clearly stating the supporting persons, institutions or organizations and their contributions to the research in the publications of supported research, not complying with ethical rules in research on humans and animals, not respecting the rights of patients in their publications, sharing the information in a work that is assigned to review as a referee before publication with others, to misuse the resources, places, facilities and devices provided or allocated for scientific research, to accuse completely unfounded, groundless and intentional ethical violations (YÖK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive, Article 8).

2. Responsibilities of Authors

All authors must contribute significantly to the research.
All data in the article must be declared as true and original.
All authors must ensure retraction and correction of errors.

3. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Evaluations should be impartial.
Reviewers should not have a conflict of interest with the research, authors and/or research funders.
Referees should cite relevant published but not cited works.
Checked articles should be kept confidential.
The reviewer has an important role in assisting editors in making editorial decisions and improving the Author's articles.
The referees are expected to complete the review of the article in a maximum of 1 month. If the referee cannot comply with this rule, he should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Referee evaluations should be made objectively and referees should clearly express their views with supporting arguments.

4. Responsibilities of Editors and of the Editorial Board

Editors have full responsibility and authority to accept or reject an article.
Editors should not have a conflict of interest regarding the articles they accept or reject.
Only articles that will contribute to the field should be accepted.
It should support the release or withdrawal of the fix when errors are found. Articles received for review should be considered confidential documents. Referees must be anonymous and prevent plagiarism/fake data.

5. Responsibilities of the Publisher

Recognizing and respecting the privacy of authors, reviewers, researchers;
To protect the copyrights and intellectual property of authors;
To ensure coordination between the boards.
To promote the independence of the editorial process.

6. Duties of Editorial Team

Editor-in-chief: The Editor-in-Chief has the responsibility to set the journal scope and ensures the manuscript review process follows Temaşa Philosophy Journal guidelines. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on acceptance or rejection of submissions after they have passed through the review process.

Deputy-Editor-in-Chief: Coordinates the workflow of the Journal
To check that the submitted manuscript is in the scopes of Journal.
To check that the submitted manuscript is prepared according to the guideline of the journal.
An initial screening of the submitted manuscripts to judge its basic suitability based on the journal policy.

7. Advisory Moard Member

The Advisory board provides guidance to the Editor-in-Chief and Assistant editor on issues regarding the direction of the journal and producing a relevant and high-quality publication.

8. Plagiarism Policy

Temaşa Philosophy Journal has adopted a zero-tolerance policy on plagiarism. Before the evaluation process begins, the author(s); The plagiarism report of the article scanned by plagiarism programs such as “iThenticate”, “Turnitin” should be uploaded to the system. After the work file and plagiarism report are uploaded to the system, the evaluation process will be started. The plagiarism report rate of the articles should not be more than 20 percent. Articles with a plagiarism report of more than 20 percent will be rejected or the author will be asked to correct for the work.

It is primarily the responsibility of the authors to check the originality of the articles sent to Temaşa Philosophy Journal. In the journal editorship, plagiarism detection software can also be used to check the originality of the article both with the recommendations of the referees and on his own initiative. Articles that do not comply with research and publication ethics or that have a risk of plagiarism are not evaluated.

When a reader discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a paper published in Temâşâ Journal of Philosophy (ISSN: 2148-371X, e-ISSN: 2651-5148) or have any other complaint about editorial content (plagiarism, duplicate papers, etc.), he/she should make a complaint by e-maill arslan_topakkaya@hotmail.com. We welcome complaints as they provide an opportunity for improvement, and we aim to respond quickly and constructively.

ETİK İLKELER VE YAYIN POLİTİKASI [Turkish]

Temaşa Felsefe Dergisi intihal konusunda sıfır tolerans politikası benimsemiştir. Değerlendirme süreci başlamadan önce yazar(lar); “iThenticate”, “Turnitin” gibi intihal programları tarafından taratılan makalenin intihal raporunu sisteme yüklemelidir. Çalışma dosyası ve intihal raporu sisteme yüklendikten sonra değerlendirme süreci başlatılacaktır. Makalelerin intihal rapor oranı yüzde 25'den fazla olmamalıdır. İntihal raporu yüzde 25'den fazla olan makaleler reddedilecektir ya da yazardan çalışma için düzeltme istenecektir.

Aşağıda yer alan etik görev ve sorumluluklar, açık erişim olarak Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) tarafından yayınlanan rehberler ve politikalar dikkate alınarak hazırlanmıştır (Bk. COPE Yönerge Türkçe):

4.  Editörlerin ve Yayın Kurulunun Sorumlulukları 

5. Yayıncının  Sorumlulukları 

Yazarların, hakemlerin, araştırmacıların gizliliğini tanımak ve saygı duymak;
Yazarların telif haklarını ve fikri mülkiyetini korumak;
Kurullar arasındaki kordinasyonu sağlamak.
Editoryal sürecin bağımsızlığını teşvik etme.

6.Editör Ekibinin Görevleri

Baş Editör: Baş Editörün dergi kapsamını belirleme sorumluluğu vardır ve makale inceleme sürecinin Temaşa Felsefe Dergisi'nin yönergelerine uygun olmasını sağlar. Baş Editör, inceleme sürecinden geçtikten sonra gönderilen yayınların kabul veya reddine ilişkin nihai kararı verir.
Editör: Derginin iş akışını koordine eder
Gönderilen makalenin Dergi kapsamında olup olmadığını kontrol etmek.
Gönderilen makalenin dergi kurallarına uygun olarak hazırlanıp hazırlanmadığını kontrol etmek.
Dergi politikasına dayalı olarak temel uygunluğunu değerlendirmek için gönderilen yazıların ilk taraması.

7.Danışma kurulu Üyesi

Danışma kurulu, derginin yönü ve ilgili ve kaliteli bir yayın üretilmesi ile ilgili konularda Baş Editör ve Editöre çalışmalarında rehberlik eder.

8. İntihal Politikası

Temaşa Felsefe Dergisi intihal konusunda sıfır tolerans politikası benimsemiştir. Değerlendirme süreci başlamadan önce yazar(lar); “iThenticate”, “Turnitin” gibi intihal programları tarafından taratılan makalenin intihal raporunu sisteme yüklemelidir. Çalışma dosyası ve intihal raporu sisteme yüklendikten sonra değerlendirme süreci başlatılacaktır. Makalelerin intihal rapor oranı yüzde 20'den fazla olmamalıdır. İntihal raporu yüzde 20'den fazla olan makaleler reddedilecektir ya da yazardan çalışma için düzeltme istenecektir.

Temaşa Felsefe Dergisi'ne gönderilen makalelerin orijinalliğini kontrol etmek öncelikli olarak yazarların sorumluluğundadır. Dergi editörlüğü'de hem hakem önerileri hem de kendi inisiyatifiyle makalenin orijinalliğini kontrol etmek amacıyla ayrıca intihal tespit yazılımı kullanabilir. Araştırma ve yayın etiğine uygun bulunmayan veya intihal riski tespit edilen makaleler kesinlikle değerlendirilmeye tabi tutulmamaktadır.

Okuyucu, Temaşa Felsefe Dergisi'nde yayınlanan bir makalede önemli bir hata veya yanlışlık fark ettiğinde veya editoryal içerikle ilgili başka bir talebi/şikayeti bulunduğunda (intihal, yinelenen makaleler vb.), şuraya şikayette bulunmalıdır: e-posta: arslan_topakkaya@hotmail.com. Talebi/Şikayetleri iyileştirme fırsatı sunduğu için memnuniyetle karşılıyoruz ve hızlı ve yapıcı bir şekilde yanıt vermeyi amaçlıyoruz.