This journal follows and strongly adheres to Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) available at: publicationethics.org and complies with the highest ethical standards in accordance with ethical laws.
To ensure that all the ethical guidelines are observed in the manuscripts submitted to the journal, all the authors are required to include Author’s Statement confirming that all the ethical guidelines have been followed in their research.
1. Duties of the authors
Reporting standards
Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Fundamental errors in published work
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
Responsibility
Authors shall be responsible for and recognized only for their own work.
Authorship
Authorship shall be limited to individuals who have made a significant scholarly contribution to the research or reported study. Authors are usually listed in order of importance and relative significance of contribution. Ghostwriting or honorary authorship is a breach of publication ethics.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
The authors shall assure that his work is original and should not submit a manuscript that has already been published or submitted elsewhere for publication.
Article Revision
Authors must strive to revise their manuscript in accordance with the suggestions provided by the reviewers and/or the Editorial Board. In the event that the authors disagrees with a requested revision, a rationale must be provided in writing by authors for not making the requested change.
2. Duties of the editors:
Fairness
The Editorial Board shall review fairly the quality of the manuscript and whether it complies to the submission guidelines and review standards. Manuscripts shall be evaluated objectively without regard to race, gender, age, institutional affiliation, and/or other personal factors. Decisions to accept or reject a manuscript shall be based on importance, originality, clarity, and relevance of the research in the submission.
Reviewer Selection
Reviewers are selected according to the content and scope of the submitted manuscripts, reviewers' area of expertise, and freedom from conflict of interest.
Confidentiality
The journal is obliged to preserve confidentiality and shall not disclose the contents of the manuscript nor the identity of the author until the final decision to publish a researcher's (author's) submission has been made.
3. Duties of the reviewers:
Reviewers shall follow the review guidelines, complete the review within the designated time frame, and submit the review to the Journal Editor-in-Chief. In the case that the reviewer feels that they are inadequately qualified to review the assigned manuscript, the reviewer shall notify the editor to excuse themselves from the review process for the manuscript in question.
Fairness
Reviews shall be fair, objective, constructive, timely, and confidential. In the manuscript review process, reviewers shall explain and support their views adequately.
Professional Respect and Integrity
When reviewing manuscripts, reviewers should respect the authors' integrity as a scholar.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript. The manuscript may not be shown to or discussed with others.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Stages of dealing with unethical publishing and research behavior
- Receiving a written accusation from an organization or a real person by the journal's office
- Convening a meeting of the editorial board of the journal in the presence of the representative of the University publishing center and the initial investigation of the charge
Collecting documents and evaluating them, if necessary, and preparing the proceedings indicating whether or not the charge was correct
- Sending charges to the authors of the charge and requesting answers within the specified time
- Reviewing the answers of the defendants in the editorial board meeting of the journal with the presence of the representative of the University publishing center and final decision making
Sending a decision to the plaintiff and the defendant along with punitive suggestions if the charge is recognized
Informing the highest research authority of the organization where offenders operate