Publication Ethic

Our Publication Ethics are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

JOURNAL PUBLISHER CODE ETHICS

Determining the name of the journal, the scope of science, and the timeline.
Determining the membership of the editorial board.
Defining the relationship between publishers, editors, peer review, and other parties in the contract.
Appreciating the confidentiality of the contributing researchers, authors, editors, and peer reviewers.
Applying norms and regulations regarding intellectual property rights, especially copyrights.
Conducting policy reviews on the journals and presenting them to authors, editorial boards, peer reviewers, and readers.
Making behavior code guidelines for editors and peer reviewers.
Publishing journals on a regular basis.
Ensuring the availability of resources for sustainable journal publishing.
Establishing cooperation and marketing networks.
Preparing for licensing and other legal aspects.

Improving the quality of publications.
Ensuring processes that maintain the quality of published papers.
Leading the freedom in delivering opinions.
Maintaining the integrity of the author's academic track record.
Conveying corrections, clarifications, withdrawals, and apologies if necessary.
Taking responsibility for styling and formatting the paper, while the content and statements remain the responsibility of the authors.
Assessing policies and attitudes in the published journal from authors and peer reviewers to increase responsibility and minimize errors.
Being open-minded in accepting new opinions or views that differ from personal viewpoints.
Prohibiting the defense of personal opinions, the author's opinions, or those of third parties that may result in false decisions.
Encouraging authors to improve their papers until they are worthy of publication.

Receiving tasks from editors to review papers and submitting reviews to determine publication feasibility.
Reviewing papers in a timely manner according to scientific principles and the journal’s style guide.
Reviewing corrected papers in accordance with standards.
Encouraging authors to improve papers by providing feedback, suggestions, and recommendations.
Maintaining author privacy, including covering results of corrections, suggestions, and recommendations.
Not reviewing papers that directly or indirectly involve the reviewer.
Following peer review guidelines and evaluating the review form provided by editors.
Reviewing papers substantively without correcting grammar, punctuation, or typos.
Ensuring principles of truth, novelty, and originality; prioritizing the paper’s benefit for scientific and technological development.
Not defending personal opinions, author opinions, or third-party interests that may compromise objectivity.
Upholding objectivity and avoiding any influence.
Ensuring confidentiality of findings until publication.
Having broad expertise and the ability to review papers appropriately.
Refusing reviews outside the reviewer’s field of expertise and recommending appropriate experts where necessary.
Being open-minded to new opinions or differing views.
Refusing review assignments if unable to meet deadlines and informing the editor as early as possible.
Presenting review results honestly, objectively, and with clear arguments. Possible recommendations:

1. Accepted without revision
2. Accepted with minor revisions (no re-review required)
3. Accepted with major revisions (requires re-review)
4. Rejected and recommended for other publication
5. Rejected and recommended not for publication due to scientific flaws

Issuing rejection for the last recommendation as a last resort related to feasibility or severe ethical violations.
Not using reviewed papers for personal or third-party interests; parts of the content may only be used with the author's permission.

Authors are collectively responsible for the work and article content, including methods, analysis, calculations, and details.
Authors must respond to peer review comments professionally and in a timely manner.
Authors must inform the editor if they retract their paper.
Authors must describe limitations within the study.
Authors respect publishers' requests not to disseminate findings before publication.
Authors inform the editor if the paper is part of phased, multidisciplinary, or perspective-diverse research.
Authors declare that submitted papers are original, unpublished in any language, and not under submission elsewhere.
Authors must notify editors immediately if errors are discovered.
Use of copyrighted materials requires written permission and proper acknowledgment.
Authors must appropriately cite and quote others' work.
New discoveries or improved inventions must acknowledge prior researchers/writers.
Authors are not allowed to list unread publications in the bibliography.
If requested, authors must provide proof that research met ethical requirements, including field notes.
Authors must respond adequately to comments or feedback after publication.

Plagiarism includes but is not limited to:

Referring to and/or quoting terms, words and/or sentences, data and/or information from a source without citing it properly.
Referring to and/or quoting random terms, words and/or sentences, data and/or information from a source without adequate citation.