The editorial guide has been prepared in accordance with the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) and YÖK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive.
1. General Responsibilities and Independence
Scientific Quality: Editors are responsible for enhancing the scientific quality of the journal, ensuring the healthy execution of publication processes, and bringing works suitable for the journal's vision into the literature.
Decision Criteria: Editorial decisions on publication are based on the work's originality, scientific validity, clarity of expression, and alignment with the journal's aims and scope.
Editorial Independence: The Editor is independent of the publisher or other political/economic focuses during the decision-making process; decisions are shaped solely based on scientific merit.
2. Impartiality and Fairness
Non-Discrimination: All submitted manuscripts are evaluated solely on their intellectual content and scientific value, without regard to the authors' race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political views.
Objectivity: Editors must maintain an objective stance, disregarding any personal closeness or hostility towards the manuscript owners.
3. Confidentiality Principles
Data Protection: Editors and editorial board staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and potential reviewers.
Unpublished Materials: Data, arguments, and analyses contained in manuscripts that are not accepted or are rejected cannot be used by editors in their own research without the express written consent of the author.
4. Peer Review Process
Preliminary Review: The Editor subjects incoming works to a preliminary review; they have the right to reject or request corrections for works that do not comply with the journal's scope or writing guidelines.
Reviewer Assignment: For works passing the preliminary review, the Editor assigns at least two reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject matter.
Anonymity: The Editor is responsible for protecting the "Double-Blind Peer Review" principle, ensuring that the identities of reviewers and authors are not disclosed to one another.
Decision Making: In cases where reviewer reports contradict each other, the Editor may consult a third reviewer or make the final decision based on their own examination.
5. Conflict of Interest
Recusal: Editors must recuse themselves from the editorial process and delegate the task to another editor or editorial board member when there is any conflict of interest (competition, collaboration, or other connections with the authors) regarding the submitted manuscripts.
Reviewer Checks: It is the Editor's responsibility to check whether reviewers have similar conflicts of interest.
6. Error and Correction Management
Corrective Actions: When a significant scientific error or inaccuracy is detected in a published article, the Editor immediately initiates the necessary procedures to publish a correction (corrigendum), retraction, or apology text in cooperation with the author.