Based on the best practices in publication ethics, AndHD aims to publish in accordance with scientific ethics within the framework of, but not limited to, transparency and best practices set by the Committee on Publication Ethics - COPE, Directory of Open Access Journals - DOAJ and Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association – OASPA.

In AndHD, the duties and responsibilities of the journal editor, authors, and reviewers are determined within this framework, and the processes are managed on the basis of COPE's associated flow charts. In addition, it is also recommended to comply with the EASE Guidelines for Authors and Translators of Scientific Articles to be Published in English, especially for manuscripts written in English.

Authors

• Except for the cited parts, any part of the works expected to be original should not have been published before.
• In the case of manuscripts with more than one author, all authors are expected to meet the criteria for authorship and each author must have contributed significantly to the relevant work. For manuscripts with multiple authors, the Contribution Rate Declaration Form must be signed by each author and uploaded to the system. Each author is responsible for the entire work.
• While the names of people who contributed to the preparation of the article but are not mentioned as authors in the manuscript should also be included, these people are not held responsible for the relevant manuscript. The contributions of these people to the manuscript are indicated with a star footnote added to the title on the first page of the manuscript.
• All of the sources used in the manuscript should be cited correctly and in accordance with the rules set out in the Author Guidelines, and should be included in the bibliography. Works that are not used in the manuscript should not be listed in the Bibliography.
• Since the raw data regarding the manuscripts must be submitted when Editorial Board deems it necessary, the authors are obliged to keep the data related to the published work for 5 years.

Reviewers

• The reviewers are expected to review the articles according to impartial and objective principles and to only review manuscripts related to their fields of expertise.
• If the reviewer does not consider himself/herself competent to evaluate the relevant work, the duty of reviewing should be avoided.
• The confidentiality of the reviewers is essential. Reviewers are prohibited from discussing the manuscripts with other people. However, if deemed necessary, with the decision of the editor, the reviewer’s comments on the relevant manuscript can be shared with other reviewers of the same manuscript.
• The reviewer who accepts the assignment is expected to send his evaluation of the work to the editor within the specified time, and when decided that it is not possible, the editor should be informed immediately.
• In case of a conflict of interest, the reviewers should refuse to review and inform the editor if a conflict of interest is discovered later.

Editors

AndHD journal editors are committed to the principles contained in COPE's Code of Conduct and Best Practices Guidelines for Journal Editors and the COPE's Best Practices Guidelines for Journal Editors. In this respect,

• The works submitted to AndHD are evaluated regardless of any element that would cause discrimination including but not limited to the authors' gender, ethnicity, and religious belief. After being accepted by the reviewers, the editorial board may decide to publish the manuscript in the next issue due to the diversity, importance, and actuality of the manuscripts in the nearest issue.
• Manuscripts can be rejected by the editor before being sent to peer-review due to incompliance with aim and scope, writing rules, and publishing policy of the journal or unoriginality. In such cases, the reason for the rejection decision is shared with the author clearly.
• The editor appoints the reviewers to work in accordance with their area of expertise. It is the editor's responsibility to share the necessary information and documents with the appointed reviewer.
• Editors create a list for the reviewers of the journal and are obliged to update this list based on the performance of the reviewers. The reviewers who do not fulfill their duties in accordance with the principles described here and in the cited texts are removed from the list.
• The editor takes the utmost care to protect the confidential information of the stakeholders, except for the information that must be shared and fulfills the requirements of a double-blind peer review system. 

Peer Review Process • Plagiarism Policy and Similarity Report • Copyright Policy • Open Access Policy • Charge Policy