Ethical Principles and Publication Policy
PUBLICATION ETHICS
TESAM Academy Journal is committed to applying the highest standards of publication ethics and to comply with the following principles of publication ethics. These principles are based on the recommendations and guidelines developed for journal editors by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Council of Science Editors (CSE), and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).
TESAM Academy Journal is expected to carry the ethical responsibilities of all stakeholders within the scope of publication ethics. In this context, Istem Journal is committed to following the Code of Conduct and Principles of Transparency and Best Practice prepared by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics). It is the duty of the Editors to follow the Cope Guidance for Editors, and the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers must be followed by the journal reviewers.
The publication processes applied in TESAM Academy Journal constitute the basis for the development and distribution of information in an impartial and reputable manner. The processes applied in this direction directly reflect on the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support the authors. Peer-reviewed studies are studies that embody and support the scientific method. At this point, it is important that all stakeholders in the process (authors, readers and researchers, publishers, referees and editors) comply with standards for ethical principles.
1. GENERAL ACTS AGAINST SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND PUBLICATION ETHICS
a) Plagiarism: Representing the original ideas, methods, data or works of others as one's own work in whole or in part without citation in accordance with scientific rules,
b) Forgery: Using non-existent or falsified data in scientific research,
c) Distortion: Falsifying research records or data obtained, falsifying devices or materials not used in the research, falsifying or shaping the results of the research in line with the interests of the persons and organizations receiving support,
d) Republishing: Presenting duplicate publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions,
e) Slicing: Dividing the results of a research into parts in a way that disrupts the integrity of the research and inappropriately and publishing them in more than one number and presenting these publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions,
f) Unfair authorship: Including or excluding people who have not actively contributed, changing the author ranking in an unjustified and inappropriate manner, removing the names of active contributors from the work 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 Include:
a) Failing to acknowledge the individuals, institutions, or organizations that provided support and their contributions in publications resulting from supported research,
b) Using fabricated or falsified data in scientific research, or distorting research records, data, or results to align with personal or organizational interests,
c) Republishing the same research in multiple publications to present them as separate works in academic appointments and promotions,
d) Fragmenting research results to publish them separately, disrupting the integrity of the research, and presenting them as distinct works in academic settings,
e) Engaging in unfair authorship practices, such as adding or omitting individuals who did not contribute or changing the author order unjustly,
f) Using unpublished theses or studies without the owner’s permission,
g) Failing to follow ethical guidelines in research involving humans and animals, including non-compliance with patient rights,
h) Violating legislation related to biomedical or clinical research, or disclosing work-in-progress details without the author's permission,
i) Misusing research resources, facilities, or equipment for personal or unrelated purposes,
j) Making unfounded accusations of ethical violations with malicious intent,
k) Publishing data from surveys or studies without obtaining explicit consent from participants or required institutional permissions,
l) Harmful practices in research that damage animal welfare or ecological balance,
m) Failing to secure proper permissions before initiating research or experiments, or conducting them in violation of laws or international agreements,
n) Neglecting the duty to inform or warn about harmful practices related to ongoing scientific research,
o) Misusing data or information obtained from third parties, violating confidentiality agreements, or failing to protect sensitive information,
p) Providing false or misleading information regarding scientific research in academic appointments and promotions.
Within the framework of ethical rules; researches that require Ethics Committee Permission for evaluation in the journal are as follows:
1. All kinds of research conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from participants using survey, interview, focus group study, observation, experiment, interview techniques,
2. Use of humans and animals (including materials/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes,
3. Clinical trials on humans,
4. Research on animals,
5. Retrospective studies in accordance with the personal data protection law.
In the studies to be evaluated in our journal within this framework;
1. Stating that the "informed consent form" has been obtained in case presentations,2. Obtaining and indicating permission from the owners for the use of scales, questionnaires, photographs belonging to others,
3. For the intellectual and artistic works used, it must be stated that copyright regulations are complied with.
4. Editors ensure that human and animal rights are protected in the studies evaluated. Editors have the responsibility to reject the study when there is no approval of the ethics committee for the subjects used in the study and no permission for experimental research. In studies requiring ethics committee approval, information about the permission (name of the committee, date and number) should be included in the method section and also on the first/last page of the article. In case reports, information on the signature of the informed consent form should be included in the article.
2. RESPONSIBILITIES OF STAKEHOLDERS
a) Responsibilities of Editors
TESAM, its editors and associate editors shall ensure the following ethical duties and responsibilities based on the principles of the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and the Publication Ethics Flowcharts developed by COPE in possible cases of misuse or violation of publication ethics:1. Impartiality and Publisher's Freedom. The editors evaluate the submitted manuscript proposals based on their relevance to the scope of the journal and the importance and originality of their work. The editors do not take into account the race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, nationality or political views of the authors submitting the manuscript proposal. The decision to revise or publish cannot be influenced by institutions other than the editorial board of the journal. The editors take care to ensure that the published issues contribute to the reader, researcher, practitioner and the scientific field and are of original quality.
2. Independence: The relationship between the editors (Editor and Associate Editors) and the publisher is based on the principle of editorial independence. According to the written agreement between the editors and the publisher, all editorial decisions 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 any influence.
3. Confidentiality. Editors do not share information about a submitted manuscript with anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers and editorial board. They ensure that manuscripts evaluated by at least two reviewers are evaluated according to a double blind review system and keep the reviewers confidential.
4. Disclosure and Differences of Opinion. Editors and editorial board members do not use unpublished information in an article submitted for their own research purposes without the express written permission of the authors.Editors should not have any conflict of interest regarding the manuscripts they accept or reject.
5. Publication Decision. The editors ensure that all articles accepted for publication are peer-reviewed by at least two referees who are experts in their fields. The editors are responsible for deciding which manuscript to publish from the manuscripts 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 such legal requirements. 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.
6. Ethical Concerns. Editors will take measures when ethical concerns arise regarding a submitted manuscript or published article. As a matter of fact, they continue their work processes without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards. Any reported unethical publishing behavior will be investigated, even if it occurs years after publication. Editors follow the COPE Flowcharts in case ethical concerns arise. If the ethical concerns are significant, a correction, retraction, or publication of the concerns in the journal may be implemented.
7. Collaboration with journal boards: Editors ensure that all advisory committee members follow editorial policies and guidelines. Inform advisory committee members about editorial policies.
Ensures that advisory board members independently evaluate their work. Contribute to new advisory board members and make decisions as appropriate. Sends work for evaluation that is appropriate to the expertise of advisory board members. Interacts regularly with the advisory board. Organizes regular meetings with the editorial board for editorial policies and journal development.
b) Responsibilities of Authors
1. Reporting Standards: Authors of original research should ensure that the work and results are accurately presented, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript proposal should include sufficient detail and references.2. Data Access and Storage: Authors are required to retain the raw data of their work. When necessary, they should make them available for editorial review if requested by the journal.
3. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must submit entirely original work, and if they have used the work or words of others, this must be properly cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
4. Multiple, duplicate, redundant or simultaneous submission/publication: Authors should not submit for consideration an article that has already been published in another journal. 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 fulfill the authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the body of the manuscript. These authorship criteria are as follows; (i) contributed to the design, implementation, data collection or analysis (ii) drafted or made significant intellectual contributions to or critically revised the manuscript, or (iii) saw, approved and agreed to submit the final version of the manuscript for publication. The corresponding author must ensure that all authors (as defined above) are included in the list of authors and declare that they have seen the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission for publication.
6. Declaration and Conflicts of Interest: Authors should disclose conflicts of interest at the earliest possible stage (usually by submitting a disclosure form at the time of manuscript submission and including a statement in the manuscript). All sources of financial support for the study should be declared (including grant/fund number or other reference number, if available).
7. Peer Review: Authors are required to participate in the peer review process and are obliged to cooperate fully by responding promptly to the editors' requests for raw data, clarifications and evidence of ethical approval and copyright permissions. In the event of an initial decision of "revision required", authors should revise and resubmit their manuscripts by the deadline for reviewers' comments in a systematic manner.
8. Major Errors in Published Works: When authors find substantial errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, they are obligated to notify the journal editors or publishers immediately and to cooperate with the journal editors or publishers to correct a typographical error (erratum) in the manuscript or to withdraw the manuscript from publication. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published paper contains a significant error or inaccuracy, the author has the obligation to immediately correct or withdraw the paper or to provide evidence of the accuracy of the paper to the editors of the journal.
c) Responsibilities of Reviewers
1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Assist editors in editorial decisions and help authors to improve their manuscripts through editorial communication. It should point out the completion of other articles, works, sources, references, citations, rules and similar deficiencies related to the article.2. Speed: Any reviewer who does not feel qualified to review the manuscript proposal or who knows that the manuscript review cannot take place in a timely manner should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review, so that a new reviewer can be appointed.
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 an invitation to review.
4. Standards of Impartiality: Comments on the manuscript proposal should be made impartially, and suggestions should be made in such a way that the authors can use them to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is not appropriate.
5. Acceptance of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work not cited by the authors. The reviewer should also inform the editor of any significant similarities between the manuscript under review and any other article (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 manuscript under review.
Publication Policy
TESAM Academy Journal is a national peer-reviewed journal published electronically in January and July, free of charge, open to access, in accordance with double-blind refereeing principles. TESAM Academy Journal is a refereed journal that publishes original and unique studies in the fields of Political Science, Economics, Foreign Policy, Sociology. The publication language of the journal is Turkish and English.OPEN ACCESS POLICY
TURKISH JOURNAL OF TESAM Adopts Budapest Open Access.
TESAM adopts an open access open access policy, as it adopts the principle that the free presentation of scientific research to humanity will increase the global sharing of knowledge. In this context, all articles published in the journal are available at https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/tesamakademi.