Ethical Principles and Publication Policy
GISTU Journal of Islamic Studies adheres to national and international standards on research and publication ethics. It complies with the Press Law, the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works, and the Guidelines on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics of Higher Education Institutions. GIBTU Islamic Studies has adopted the International Principles of Ethical Publishing published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).
GIBTU Journal of Islamic Studies is also committed to complying with the Decisions of the Turkish Editors Workshop:
1. Press Law
2. Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works
3. Guidelines on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics of Higher Education Institutions
4. Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Academic Publishing
5. Decisions of the Turkish Editors Workshop Statement on
Publication Ethics
Correction, Retraction, Expression of Concern
Editors may consider publishing corrections if minor errors are detected in the published article that do not affect the findings, interpretations, and conclusions. Editors should consider retracting a paper in cases of major errors/violations that invalidate the findings and conclusions. If there is a possibility of research or publication misconduct by the authors; if there is evidence that the findings are unreliable and the authors' institutions are not investigating the incident, or if the possible investigation appears to be unfair or inconclusive, editors should consider publishing an expression of concern. COPE guidelines are taken into account regarding correction, retraction, or expression of concern.
Plagiarism Action Plan and Journal Measures
The journal respects intellectual property and aims to protect and promote the original work of its authors. Plagiarized articles are against the standards of quality, research, and innovation. Therefore, all authors submitting articles to the journal are expected to adhere to ethical standards and avoid plagiarism in any form. In cases where an author is suspected of plagiarism in a submitted or published article, the journal's Ethics Editor will first review the paper. The paper will then be reviewed by the Editorial Board. The Journal will then contact the author(s) within two weeks to submit their explanations. If the journal does not receive any response from the author within the specified period, it will contact the author's affiliated university to investigate the claim.
The journal will take the following serious measures against published articles found to contain plagiarism:
1. The journal will immediately contact the author's affiliated university to take definitive action against the relevant author.
2. The journal will remove the PDF copy of the published article from its website and disable all links to the full-text article. The phrase Plagiarized Article will be added to the title of the published article.
3. The journal will disable the author account and reject all future submissions from the author for 3 years.
This journal checks for plagiarism in submitted works: Pre-checked articles are scanned for plagiarism using the İNTİHAL.NET software. Authors will be notified if plagiarism/self-plagiarism is detected. Editors may check the article for plagiarism at various stages of the review or production process, if necessary. High similarity rates may result in a paper being rejected before acceptance or even after acceptance. This rate is expected to be less than 20%.
a) Responsibilities of Editors
GISTU Journal of Islamic Studies, its editors and field editors shall fulfill the following ethical duties and responsibilities based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, the Committee on PublicationEthics (COPE) published the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, and the Publication Ethics Flowcharts developed by COPE in cases of possible misuse or violation of publication ethics:
• Impartiality and Publisher Freedom: Editors evaluate submitted article proposals based on their relevance to the journal’s scope and the importance and originality of their work. Editors do not take into consideration the race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, nationality or political views of the authors who submit article proposals. Other institutions other than the journal’s editorial board cannot influence the decision to correct or publish. Editors take care that the published issues contribute to the reader, researcher, practitioner and scientific field and are original.
• Independence: The relationship between the Editors (Editor and Assistant Editors) and the publisher is based on the principle of editorial independence. According to the written agreement between the editors and the publisher, all decisions of the editors are independent of the publisher and the journal owner. Editors should reject incomplete and erroneous research that does not comply with the journal policy, publication rules and level without being influenced in any way.
• Confidentiality: Editors do not share information about a submitted article with anyone other than the responsible author, referees and the editorial board. They ensure that articles evaluated by at least two referees are evaluated according to the double-blind refereeing system and keep the referees confidential.
• Information and Differences of Opinion: Editors and editorial board members do not use unpublished information in a submitted article for their own research purposes without the express written permission of the authors. Editors should not have a conflict of interest regarding the articles they accept or reject.
• Publication Decision: Editors ensure that all articles accepted for publication are subject to peer review by at least two referees who are experts in their fields. Editors are responsible for deciding which work will be published from the articles submitted to the journal, based on the validity of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the comments of the referees, and legal requirements such as these. Editors have the responsibility and authority to accept or reject articles. Therefore, they must use their responsibility and authority appropriately and in a timely manner.
• Ethical Concerns: Editors will take measures when ethical concerns arise regarding a submitted article or a published article. Indeed, they continue their business processes without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards. Every unethical publishing behavior reported will be investigated, even if it occurs years after publication. Editors follow COPE Flowcharts in case of ethical concerns. If ethical issues are significant, corrections, retractions, or concerns about the subject may be published in the journal.
• Collaboration with Journal Boards: Editors ensure that all advisory committee members follow the publication policies and guidelines. Provide advisory board members with information about publication policies. Ensure that advisory board members independently evaluate their work. May contribute to new advisory board members and make decisions as appropriate. Submit work that is relevant to the expertise of advisory board members for evaluation. Interact regularly with the advisory board. Hold regular meetings with the editorial board to discuss publication policies and journal development.
b) Author Responsibilities
1. Reporting standards: Authors of original research must ensure that the work and results are presented accurately, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript proposal must include sufficient detail and references.
2. Data access and storage: Authors are required to retain the raw data of their work. They must submit it for editorial review, if requested by the journal.
3. Originality and plagiarism: Authors must submit completely original work, and if they use the work or words of others, this must be properly cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Therefore, a similarity rate report is requested from all authors submitting articles to the journal.
4. Multiple, duplicate, redundant or simultaneous submissions/publications: Authors should not submit an article previously published in another journal for consideration. Simultaneous submission of an article to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
5. Authorship of the article: Only individuals who meet the authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the body of the article. These authorship criteria are as follows; (i) contributed to the design, implementation, data collection or analysis stages, (ii) prepared the article or provided significant intellectual input or revised it critically, or (iii) viewed, approved and agreed to submit the final version of the article for publication. The corresponding author should ensure that all authors (according to the definition above) are included in the author list and attest that the authors have viewed the final version of the article and agreed to submit it for publication.
6. Declaration and conflicts of interest: Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest at the earliest possible stage (usually by providing a disclosure form during article submission and including a declaration in the article). All sources of financial support for the work should be declared (including grant/funding number or other license number, if applicable).
7. Peer review process: Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethical approval and copyright permissions. In the event of a “revision required” decision, authors must systematically review and resubmit their manuscripts by the deadline for reviewers’ comments.
8. Fundamental errors in published work: Authors are obliged to promptly notify journal editors or publishers when they discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work and to cooperate with journal editors or publishers to correct an erratum or withdraw the paper from publication. If editors or publishers learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, they must take on the obligation of the author to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the paper that the paper is correct.
c) Responsibilities of Reviewers
1. Contribution to editorial decisions: The editor assists the editors in their decisions and assists authors in improving their papers through editorial communication. It should indicate the completion of other articles, works, sources, citations, rules, etc. related to the article.
2. Speed: Any referee who does not feel qualified to review the article proposal or who knows that the article review will not be completed in a timely manner should immediately notify the editors and decline the review invitation, thus ensuring that a new referee is assigned.
3. Confidentiality: All manuscript proposals submitted for review are confidential documents and should be treated as such. They should not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor. This also applies to reviewers who decline the review invitation.
4. Standards of impartiality: Comments on the manuscript proposal should be made impartially and suggestions should be made that the authors can use to improve the manuscript. Personal criticisms of the authors are not appropriate.
5. Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published works not cited by the authors. The reviewer should also inform the editor of any significant similarity between the reviewed manuscript and any other manuscript (published or unpublished).
6. Conflicts of interest: Conflicts of interest should be reported to the editor. There should be no conflict of interest between the reviewers and the stakeholders of the reviewed manuscript.
The studies submitted for review are checked for plagiarism using the İNTİHAL.NET software. The similarity rate is expected to be less than 20%. The main measure of similarity is the author's compliance with the citation and citation rules. If the similarity rate appears to be 1% but the citation and quotation are not done properly, plagiarism may still occur. In this respect, the citation and quotation rules should be known by the author and should be applied carefully (For detailed information, you can visit the website https://www.isnadsistemi.org/).
Citation/Indirect Quotation: If a reference is made to an idea, discussion or observation in a source and the cited opinion is put on the line with the referencing researcher’s own words, a footnote mark (1) should be placed at the end of the sentence. If the citation is to a specific page or page range of the work, the page number should be given. If there is a reference to the entire work, that is, if the citation is made to an extent that requires the reader to examine the entire work, the source should be stated in the footnote after the expressions “See this issue,” “See this opinion,” “See this discussion,” or simply “See.”
Quotation: If the relevant part of the source is taken as is, without changing the period and comma, the quoted part is given “in double quotation marks” and the source is indicated by giving a footnote number1 at the end. Quotations in the directly quoted text are written using “single quotation marks”. If the directly quoted part is longer than three lines (more than forty words), it is shown as a separate paragraph. In order to distinguish long quotations from the main text, it is preferable to write in a font size one size smaller than the normal text size and to indent the entire paragraph from the left at the beginning of the line. In the directly quoted text, some words, sentences and paragraphs can be removed, provided that the meaning is not changed. Three dots (…) are placed in place of the removed parts. It is not correct to write a part quoted from a source without “in double quotation marks” and to be content with writing the source only at the end. If these rules are not followed, the author may be accused of violation of publication ethics (Plagiarism).
Actions that are against scientific research and publication ethics are as follows: (For detailed information, visit https://www.isnadsistemi.org/ website.)
Plagiarism : Presenting others' ideas, methods, data, applications, writings, figures or works as one's own work, partially or completely, without citing their owners in accordance with scientific rules.
Forgery: Producing data that is not based on research, editing or changing a presented or published work based on false data, reporting or publishing these, presenting a research that has not been done as if it was done.
Distortion: Falsifying research records and obtained data, presenting methods, devices and materials that were not used in the research as if they were used, not evaluating data that is not in accordance with the research hypothesis, tampering with data and/or results to fit the relevant theory or assumptions, and falsifying or shaping research results in line with the interests of persons and organizations from which support is received.
Repeat Publication : Presenting more than one work containing the same results of a research as separate works in associate professorship exam evaluations and academic promotions.
Slicing: Presenting the results of a research as separate works in the evaluation of associate professorship exams and academic promotions by dividing them into inappropriate parts in a way that disrupts the integrity of the research and by publishing multiple publications without citing each other.
Unfair Authorship: Including people who have no active contribution among the authors, not including people who have actively contributed among the authors, changing the author order in an unjustified and inappropriate manner, removing the names of those who have actively contributed from the work during publication or in subsequent editions, using one’s influence to have one’s name included among the authors even though one has not actively contributed.
Other Types of Ethical Violations : Not clearly stating the supporting persons, institutions or organizations and their contributions to the research in the publications of research conducted with support, not complying with ethical rules in research conducted on humans and animals, not respecting patient rights in publications, sharing information in a work that one has been assigned to review as a referee with others before publication, using resources, places, facilities and devices provided or allocated for scientific research for purposes other than intended, making completely unfounded, unfounded and intentional accusations of ethical violations (YÖK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive, Article 8).
Preventing Plagiarism
When a reader notices a significant error or inaccuracy in an article published in the GIBTU Journal of Islamic Studies or has any complaints about the editorial content (plagiarism, duplicate articles, etc.), they can complain to the journal editors.
Conflict of
Interest The author(s) of the article must declare that they have no personal or financial conflict of interest within the scope of the study. They should state this declaration under the heading “Conflict of Interest” at the end of the article. When referees suspect that there is a conflict of interest in the article they are evaluating, they must inform the journal editorial board about the evaluation process and, if necessary, reject the evaluation of the article. In order to prevent conflict of interest, people from the institutions where the authors of the article work cannot serve as referees for the article. Editors should not have any personal or financial conflict of interest with the authors.
GIBTU Journal of Islamic Studies is also committed to complying with the Decisions of the Turkish Editors Workshop:
1. Press Law
2. Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works
3. Guidelines on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics of Higher Education Institutions
4. Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Academic Publishing
5. Decisions of the Turkish Editors Workshop Statement on
Publication Ethics
Correction, Retraction, Expression of Concern
Editors may consider publishing corrections if minor errors are detected in the published article that do not affect the findings, interpretations, and conclusions. Editors should consider retracting a paper in cases of major errors/violations that invalidate the findings and conclusions. If there is a possibility of research or publication misconduct by the authors; if there is evidence that the findings are unreliable and the authors' institutions are not investigating the incident, or if the possible investigation appears to be unfair or inconclusive, editors should consider publishing an expression of concern. COPE guidelines are taken into account regarding correction, retraction, or expression of concern.
Plagiarism Action Plan and Journal Measures
The journal respects intellectual property and aims to protect and promote the original work of its authors. Plagiarized articles are against the standards of quality, research, and innovation. Therefore, all authors submitting articles to the journal are expected to adhere to ethical standards and avoid plagiarism in any form. In cases where an author is suspected of plagiarism in a submitted or published article, the journal's Ethics Editor will first review the paper. The paper will then be reviewed by the Editorial Board. The Journal will then contact the author(s) within two weeks to submit their explanations. If the journal does not receive any response from the author within the specified period, it will contact the author's affiliated university to investigate the claim.
The journal will take the following serious measures against published articles found to contain plagiarism:
1. The journal will immediately contact the author's affiliated university to take definitive action against the relevant author.
2. The journal will remove the PDF copy of the published article from its website and disable all links to the full-text article. The phrase Plagiarized Article will be added to the title of the published article.
3. The journal will disable the author account and reject all future submissions from the author for 3 years.
This journal checks for plagiarism in submitted works: Pre-checked articles are scanned for plagiarism using the İNTİHAL.NET software. Authors will be notified if plagiarism/self-plagiarism is detected. Editors may check the article for plagiarism at various stages of the review or production process, if necessary. High similarity rates may result in a paper being rejected before acceptance or even after acceptance. This rate is expected to be less than 20%.
a) Responsibilities of Editors
GISTU Journal of Islamic Studies, its editors and field editors shall fulfill the following ethical duties and responsibilities based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, the Committee on PublicationEthics (COPE) published the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, and the Publication Ethics Flowcharts developed by COPE in cases of possible misuse or violation of publication ethics:
• Impartiality and Publisher Freedom: Editors evaluate submitted article proposals based on their relevance to the journal’s scope and the importance and originality of their work. Editors do not take into consideration the race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, nationality or political views of the authors who submit article proposals. Other institutions other than the journal’s editorial board cannot influence the decision to correct or publish. Editors take care that the published issues contribute to the reader, researcher, practitioner and scientific field and are original.
• Independence: The relationship between the Editors (Editor and Assistant Editors) and the publisher is based on the principle of editorial independence. According to the written agreement between the editors and the publisher, all decisions of the editors are independent of the publisher and the journal owner. Editors should reject incomplete and erroneous research that does not comply with the journal policy, publication rules and level without being influenced in any way.
• Confidentiality: Editors do not share information about a submitted article with anyone other than the responsible author, referees and the editorial board. They ensure that articles evaluated by at least two referees are evaluated according to the double-blind refereeing system and keep the referees confidential.
• Information and Differences of Opinion: Editors and editorial board members do not use unpublished information in a submitted article for their own research purposes without the express written permission of the authors. Editors should not have a conflict of interest regarding the articles they accept or reject.
• Publication Decision: Editors ensure that all articles accepted for publication are subject to peer review by at least two referees who are experts in their fields. Editors are responsible for deciding which work will be published from the articles submitted to the journal, based on the validity of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the comments of the referees, and legal requirements such as these. Editors have the responsibility and authority to accept or reject articles. Therefore, they must use their responsibility and authority appropriately and in a timely manner.
• Ethical Concerns: Editors will take measures when ethical concerns arise regarding a submitted article or a published article. Indeed, they continue their business processes without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards. Every unethical publishing behavior reported will be investigated, even if it occurs years after publication. Editors follow COPE Flowcharts in case of ethical concerns. If ethical issues are significant, corrections, retractions, or concerns about the subject may be published in the journal.
• Collaboration with Journal Boards: Editors ensure that all advisory committee members follow the publication policies and guidelines. Provide advisory board members with information about publication policies. Ensure that advisory board members independently evaluate their work. May contribute to new advisory board members and make decisions as appropriate. Submit work that is relevant to the expertise of advisory board members for evaluation. Interact regularly with the advisory board. Hold regular meetings with the editorial board to discuss publication policies and journal development.
b) Author Responsibilities
1. Reporting standards: Authors of original research must ensure that the work and results are presented accurately, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript proposal must include sufficient detail and references.
2. Data access and storage: Authors are required to retain the raw data of their work. They must submit it for editorial review, if requested by the journal.
3. Originality and plagiarism: Authors must submit completely original work, and if they use the work or words of others, this must be properly cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Therefore, a similarity rate report is requested from all authors submitting articles to the journal.
4. Multiple, duplicate, redundant or simultaneous submissions/publications: Authors should not submit an article previously published in another journal for consideration. Simultaneous submission of an article to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
5. Authorship of the article: Only individuals who meet the authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the body of the article. These authorship criteria are as follows; (i) contributed to the design, implementation, data collection or analysis stages, (ii) prepared the article or provided significant intellectual input or revised it critically, or (iii) viewed, approved and agreed to submit the final version of the article for publication. The corresponding author should ensure that all authors (according to the definition above) are included in the author list and attest that the authors have viewed the final version of the article and agreed to submit it for publication.
6. Declaration and conflicts of interest: Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest at the earliest possible stage (usually by providing a disclosure form during article submission and including a declaration in the article). All sources of financial support for the work should be declared (including grant/funding number or other license number, if applicable).
7. Peer review process: Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethical approval and copyright permissions. In the event of a “revision required” decision, authors must systematically review and resubmit their manuscripts by the deadline for reviewers’ comments.
8. Fundamental errors in published work: Authors are obliged to promptly notify journal editors or publishers when they discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work and to cooperate with journal editors or publishers to correct an erratum or withdraw the paper from publication. If editors or publishers learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, they must take on the obligation of the author to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the paper that the paper is correct.
c) Responsibilities of Reviewers
1. Contribution to editorial decisions: The editor assists the editors in their decisions and assists authors in improving their papers through editorial communication. It should indicate the completion of other articles, works, sources, citations, rules, etc. related to the article.
2. Speed: Any referee who does not feel qualified to review the article proposal or who knows that the article review will not be completed in a timely manner should immediately notify the editors and decline the review invitation, thus ensuring that a new referee is assigned.
3. Confidentiality: All manuscript proposals submitted for review are confidential documents and should be treated as such. They should not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor. This also applies to reviewers who decline the review invitation.
4. Standards of impartiality: Comments on the manuscript proposal should be made impartially and suggestions should be made that the authors can use to improve the manuscript. Personal criticisms of the authors are not appropriate.
5. Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published works not cited by the authors. The reviewer should also inform the editor of any significant similarity between the reviewed manuscript and any other manuscript (published or unpublished).
6. Conflicts of interest: Conflicts of interest should be reported to the editor. There should be no conflict of interest between the reviewers and the stakeholders of the reviewed manuscript.
The studies submitted for review are checked for plagiarism using the İNTİHAL.NET software. The similarity rate is expected to be less than 20%. The main measure of similarity is the author's compliance with the citation and citation rules. If the similarity rate appears to be 1% but the citation and quotation are not done properly, plagiarism may still occur. In this respect, the citation and quotation rules should be known by the author and should be applied carefully (For detailed information, you can visit the website https://www.isnadsistemi.org/).
Citation/Indirect Quotation: If a reference is made to an idea, discussion or observation in a source and the cited opinion is put on the line with the referencing researcher’s own words, a footnote mark (1) should be placed at the end of the sentence. If the citation is to a specific page or page range of the work, the page number should be given. If there is a reference to the entire work, that is, if the citation is made to an extent that requires the reader to examine the entire work, the source should be stated in the footnote after the expressions “See this issue,” “See this opinion,” “See this discussion,” or simply “See.”
Quotation: If the relevant part of the source is taken as is, without changing the period and comma, the quoted part is given “in double quotation marks” and the source is indicated by giving a footnote number1 at the end. Quotations in the directly quoted text are written using “single quotation marks”. If the directly quoted part is longer than three lines (more than forty words), it is shown as a separate paragraph. In order to distinguish long quotations from the main text, it is preferable to write in a font size one size smaller than the normal text size and to indent the entire paragraph from the left at the beginning of the line. In the directly quoted text, some words, sentences and paragraphs can be removed, provided that the meaning is not changed. Three dots (…) are placed in place of the removed parts. It is not correct to write a part quoted from a source without “in double quotation marks” and to be content with writing the source only at the end. If these rules are not followed, the author may be accused of violation of publication ethics (Plagiarism).
Actions that are against scientific research and publication ethics are as follows: (For detailed information, visit https://www.isnadsistemi.org/ website.)
Plagiarism : Presenting others' ideas, methods, data, applications, writings, figures or works as one's own work, partially or completely, without citing their owners in accordance with scientific rules.
Forgery: Producing data that is not based on research, editing or changing a presented or published work based on false data, reporting or publishing these, presenting a research that has not been done as if it was done.
Distortion: Falsifying research records and obtained data, presenting methods, devices and materials that were not used in the research as if they were used, not evaluating data that is not in accordance with the research hypothesis, tampering with data and/or results to fit the relevant theory or assumptions, and falsifying or shaping research results in line with the interests of persons and organizations from which support is received.
Repeat Publication : Presenting more than one work containing the same results of a research as separate works in associate professorship exam evaluations and academic promotions.
Slicing: Presenting the results of a research as separate works in the evaluation of associate professorship exams and academic promotions by dividing them into inappropriate parts in a way that disrupts the integrity of the research and by publishing multiple publications without citing each other.
Unfair Authorship: Including people who have no active contribution among the authors, not including people who have actively contributed among the authors, changing the author order in an unjustified and inappropriate manner, removing the names of those who have actively contributed from the work during publication or in subsequent editions, using one’s influence to have one’s name included among the authors even though one has not actively contributed.
Other Types of Ethical Violations : Not clearly stating the supporting persons, institutions or organizations and their contributions to the research in the publications of research conducted with support, not complying with ethical rules in research conducted on humans and animals, not respecting patient rights in publications, sharing information in a work that one has been assigned to review as a referee with others before publication, using resources, places, facilities and devices provided or allocated for scientific research for purposes other than intended, making completely unfounded, unfounded and intentional accusations of ethical violations (YÖK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive, Article 8).
Preventing Plagiarism
When a reader notices a significant error or inaccuracy in an article published in the GIBTU Journal of Islamic Studies or has any complaints about the editorial content (plagiarism, duplicate articles, etc.), they can complain to the journal editors.
Conflict of
Interest The author(s) of the article must declare that they have no personal or financial conflict of interest within the scope of the study. They should state this declaration under the heading “Conflict of Interest” at the end of the article. When referees suspect that there is a conflict of interest in the article they are evaluating, they must inform the journal editorial board about the evaluation process and, if necessary, reject the evaluation of the article. In order to prevent conflict of interest, people from the institutions where the authors of the article work cannot serve as referees for the article. Editors should not have any personal or financial conflict of interest with the authors.