HUMANISTIC PERSPECTIVE ETHICAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Authors who want to submit an article to the Humanistic Perspective are expected to fulfill the following ethical responsibilities.

1. Studies submitted to the Humanistic Perspective journal must be original. Authors may use other sources to support their thoughts or findings by citing the source. However, every source used should be cited in the text according to the rules of our journal (APA 7) and should be included in the bibliography section. Authors should submit their articles according to our journal's Authoring Rules and using our Article Template.
2. Authors should refrain from citing people who did not contribute to the study as authors in the articles they send to the Humanistic Perspective.
3. Authors must disclose any conflict of interest and authorship relationship with other authors.
4. Our referees or editors may request raw data from authors when necessary. In such a case, the corresponding author should be open to sharing the raw data.
5. Authors must be authorized to use the data they analyze in their studies. In case the research data is obtained from another real or legal entity, they must certify that they have the right to use the data.
6. The authors should have a document stating that the participants participated in the study according to their wishes and informed the participants about the purpose and scope of the study.
7. Authors have to cooperate with the editor in cases such as errors or omissions in the published, early view or evaluation phase of the articles they send to our journal.
8. Authors are aware that their opinions in published, early view or review articles submitted to our journal are their own. They accept that any legal and penal responsibilities that may arise from these views, if any, spelling deficiencies and errors belong to them, and they know that the negativities that may arise from other situations do not bind the Humanistic Perspective.
9. The authors accept and undertake that the articles they have sent to our journal have been published in another journal or not sent for publication.
10. Authors cannot offer to change author responsibilities (add new authors, change the order of authors, remove some authors) in the articles they submit for evaluation.
11. If the author received support from anywhere while creating their article, they can add their thanks for the support to the article.
12. Authors should notify the editor of the special circumstances of their article (previously the abstract was presented as a congress paper, the publication removed from the thesis article). This special case information, which cannot be transmitted for any reason in the "Notes to the Editor" section during article submission, should be sent to the editorial mail on the main page of our journal.
13. Authors must fill in and sign the “Candidate Article Undertaking”, “Copyright Transfer Form” and “Layout Undertaking” before publishing the article during article submission.
14. Authors know that they can only withdraw their "Pre Review" articles. However, in an article that needs to be withdrawn for any reason, all authors must fill in the "Article Withdrawal Form" with wet signature. In the form signed for retraction, the reason why the article is requested to be withdrawn should be clearly stated.
15. Authors must document the originality of the articles they have sent to our journal and the similarity rate of their work with plagiarism detection programs. Therefore, a similarity report is requested from the authors during article submission. Authors who are not authorized to receive a similarity report can resolve this situation by contacting the editor.

Ethical Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

Humanistic Perspective editor and field editors have the ethical duties and responsibilities listed below within the scope of "COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" published by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) they must fulfill.

1. Editor and Field Editors meet the information needs of readers and authors about the journal.
2. The Editor and Field Editors ensure that the journal is developed with scientific understanding and meticulousness.
3. Editors and Field Editors meticulously examine the articles submitted for publication and contribute to the publication of quality publications by conveying the referee's opinions to the authors.
4. The Editor and Field Editors initiate the evaluation process of the articles that are within the scope of the journal or reject the articles that are not within the scope of the journal.

Ethical Responsibilities of Referees

Articles submitted for publication to the Humanistic Perspective are evaluated with a double-blind peer-review system.

1. Reviewers know that the evaluation process is carried out confidentially and carefully examine the articles they accept for evaluation.
2. Reviewers cannot evaluate articles that are not related to their field of expertise. Therefore, they should only accept articles that they think are in their field of expertise for evaluation.
3. The referees must submit an objective, impartial, scientific, understandable and constructive evaluation report about the article within the time given to them.
4. If the referees think that the time given to them is not enough to evaluate the work, they can request additional time from the editor.
5. Referee reports should be uploaded to the system to be delivered to the author, along with the evaluation form, along with correction suggestions in the text.
   The referees should immediately notify the editor if they think that the article is not original or is a copy from other works while evaluating the article they have accepted for evaluation.
6. If the referees think that there is a conflict of interest in the article they accepted for review, they can notify the editor and stop evaluating the article.
7. When the referees complete the evaluation of the article they have accepted for evaluation, they have to destroy the versions of the article sent to them other than the published version.
8. Reviewers should make their evaluations based only on the content of the article. They should refrain from making any evaluations based on their religious beliefs, political views or sexist perspectives.
9. Referees are effective in increasing the quality of the article and strengthening it scientifically. Therefore, a constructive language should be used in the suggestions considered for the article. Hostile, condescending, insulting language should not be used.

If You Encounter an Unethical Situation

When our readers, writers, referees and field editors encounter an unethical situation within the scope of the above-mentioned ethical duties and responsibilities, they can immediately report this situation to info@humanisticperspective.com.