In scientific papers sent to Harran University Engineering Journal, the Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics directive and the principles set by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) for Editors and Authors should be taken into consideration.

Authors' duties

Authors of the original research paper should present the significance of the work performed. The underlying data must be shown correctly in the article. The article must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to reproduce the work. Fraud or intentional misrepresentation is considered unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study with the manuscript for editorial review and, if applicable, should be prepared to make the data publicly available.

Authors will present only completely original works and will appropriately cite other works. Publications that are effective in determining the quality of the article should also be mentioned.

In general, articles describing the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Submitting the same article to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Articles published elsewhere as copyrighted material cannot be submitted.

Anyone who has made significant contributions should be listed as a co-author. The corresponding author ensures that all contributing co-authors are found and that people who have never participated are not added to the author list. The corresponding author also confirms that all co-authors have approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to submit it for publication.
When the author discovers a material error or inaccuracy in her published work, he/she has the obligation to immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the article.
Responsibilities of Authors

Author(s) before and/or during the submission process;

Please ensure that all submitted research is original, fully referenced, and that all authors are accurately represented. Submission must be private and not considered elsewhere.

Provide accurate contact information for a designated author, where the publisher and the editor are deemed to be solely responsible for the authorship of the article and for all communications regarding the morality and originality of the article.

Give the source of all data and third-party materials, including previously unpublished work by the authors. Any element that could compromise the originality of the presentation should be expressly avoided and/or discussed with the editorial office in the first instance.

Identify the contributions to the article of any third parties they intend to include in their article, and in each case obtain written permission from the relevant copyright holders for reuse. These permissions should be submitted when the manuscript is accepted or requires acceptance of minor changes.

Expect transparency, efficiency, and respect from the publisher and editor in the submission process. Stay in good communication with both the publisher and the editor.

Cooperate with the retraction of articles that are found to be unethical, misleading or harmful, as well as in case of inaccurate publication. Stay in good communication with the editor(s), publisher and other authors. Also take into consideration the principles stated below.

1. The journal scans research articles that reflect an original research in the fields of science, technology and engineering at national and international level with its findings and results and contributes to science, scientific articles in sufficient number (at least 50 sources and 10,000 words) and summarizes the subject at today's level of knowledge and technology, It accepts review articles, case reports and technical notes (maximum 2000 words and maximum 4 images/tables) that evaluate and compare findings.

2. Letters to the editor and discussion type publications are not included in our journal.

3. Articles that are suitable for evaluation in terms of writing and publication principles are directed to the reviewers. At least two reviewers are assigned to evaluate each article that passes editor's approval.

4. Blind peer review is used in article evaluations in our journal. The names of the reviewers who evaluate the articles are not notified to the authors. Reviewers are also enabled to evaluate the articles without seeing the names of the authors.

5. Articles sent to reviewers are expected to be evaluated within 15 days. If this period is exceeded, the editor reminds the reviewer and gives an additional period of 15 days. If this period is exceeded, the editor appoints a new reviewer and withdraws the request from him/her.

6. An article that receives at least two positive evaluation reports is eligible to be published. The article that receives one positive and one negative reviewer report is sent to two more reviewers. The final decision about the article is made by the editors.

7. The decision to accept or reject the article is made by the editors. In line with the recommendations of the reviewers, a major (re-submit for evaluation) or minor (correction required) revision decision is made for the articles that are not deemed sufficient. Articles that do not reach the desired level and are not deemed scientifically sufficient are rejected.

8. After the "resubmit for evaluation" or "correction required" decision about the article, the changes requested by the reviewers must be made within 30 days for the "resubmit for evaluation" decision and within 15 days for the "correction required" decision. Otherwise, the article will be rejected.

9. Articles submitted for publication must not have been published anywhere or sent to any journal for publication.

10. All responsibility for the articles belongs to the respective authors. Articles must be prepared in accordance with internationally accepted scientific ethics rules by checking them with plagiarism detection software to check their originality before submission. Where necessary, a copy of the Ethics Committee Report should be attached.

11. Articles submitted for publication in our journal must be prepared according to the journal article writing format. Otherwise, the article will be rejected.

12. Articles sent for evaluation should be prepared according to the journal article writing format and should not exceed 10 pages. The article summary should contain a maximum of 400 words, and the number of keywords should be at least 3 and at most 6.

13. No evaluation or application fee is charged for articles submitted for publication to Harran University Journal of Engineering.

14. During the article submission phase, the authors will first upload the necessary files for blind peer review. Articles that are ACCEPTED after the review process, author names, e-mail, institution information, ORCID, etc. that should be left blank in the first upload. The information left blank will be filled in and re-uploaded to the system by the author in the final edited version accepted by the reviewers in a ready-for-publication format. Once these processes are completed, the articles will be queued for publication.

Editors' responsibilities

The editor is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal will be published. The editor evaluates articles without taking into account the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship, or political philosophies. The decision will be based on the importance, originality and clarity of the article and its relevance to the validity of the work and the scope of the journal. Existing legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism should also be taken into account.

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher.

Unpublished materials described in a submitted article will not be used by the editor or members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the express written permission of the author.

Responsibilities of reviewers

The peer review process assists the editor and editorial board in making editorial decisions and can also serve the author in the development of the article.

Any reviewer who is not qualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or who knows that immediate review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Articles submitted for review should be treated as confidential documents. It should not be shared or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

Comments should be made objectively. Reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should identify cases where the relevant published work cited in the article is not cited in the reference section. They should indicate whether observations or discussions from other publications accompany relevant sources. Reviewers will notify the editor that there is a significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and other published manuscripts for which they have personal information.

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts for which they have competitive, collaborative, or conflict of interest arising from relationships with other authors, organizations or institutions affiliated with the newspapers.

References

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf

Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive:
https://www.yok.gov.tr/Sayfalar/Kurumsal/mevzuat/bilimsel-arastirma-ve-etik-yonetmeligi.aspx