Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Original research authors should give an accurate summary of the work done and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the study's relevance.
The paper should provide enough information and references to allow others to duplicate the work. Editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be explicitly recognized as such, whereas review articles should be truthful, objective, and complete. False or willfully inaccurate statements are unethical and must be avoided at all costs.

Data access and retention

Authors may be required to submit their study's raw data along with their publication for editorial review, and they should be prepared to make the data publicly available if possible. In any case, authors should make such data accessible to other qualified professionals for at least 5 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), assuming that the participants' confidentiality can be protected and that legal rights to proprietary data do not prevent their release.

Originality and plagiarism

Authors should make sure that only totally original works are authored and submitted, and that any work and/or words borrowed from others are properly cited.
Publications that influenced the nature of the research discussed in the essay should also be mentioned. Plagiarism can take several forms, ranging from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing large portions of another's paper (without acknowledgment), to claiming results from other people's research. Plagiarism, in any form, is unethical publication behavior and must be avoided.

Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or concurrent submission/publication

It is not recommended that papers covering essentially the same study be published in more than one journal or principal publication. As a result, writers should not submit an article that has already been published in another journal for consideration. Submitting a manuscript to multiple journals at the same time is unethical and inappropriate publishing behavior.

Authorship of the manuscript

Only those who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript because they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: I contributed significantly to the study's conception, design, or analysis/interpretation; (ii) drafted the manuscript or critically revised it for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All individuals who made significant contributions to the work reported in the publication but do not fit the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after written permission to be named has been acquired. The corresponding author should double-check that the author list includes all suitable coauthors and excludes any inappropriate coauthors, as well as that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its publication submission.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Any conflicts of interest that could be regarded as influencing the results or their interpretation in the paper should be disclosed as soon as feasible. Financial conflicts of interest, such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, should be disclosed, as should non-financial conflicts of interest, such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials. All sources of funding for the project should be mentioned.

Acknowledgment of sources

Authors should make sure that they have correctly acknowledged others' contributions and that they have cited publications that have influenced the character of the reported study. Without the source's clear, written permission, information collected privately may not be used or publicized. Unless they have secured the specific written consent of the author(s) of the work involved in these services, authors should not utilize information obtained in the course of delivering confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications.

Hazards and human or animal subjects

The writers must clearly identify any chemicals, processes, or equipment that have any special dangers inherent in their use in the manuscript. If the study involves animals or human participants, the authors must ensure that all procedures were carried out in accordance with applicable laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) approved them; a statement to this effect should be included in the manuscript. Authors should also add a statement in the publication stating that informed consent was acquired for human experiments. Human participants' private rights must always be respected.

Peer review

Authors must take part in the peer-review process and cooperate completely with editors by providing raw data, clarifications, and verification of ethics approval, patient consents, and copyright permissions as soon as possible. When a first decision of "revisions necessary" is made, authors should reply to the reviewers' remarks in a methodical, point-by-point, and timely manner, amending and resubmitting their manuscript to the journal within the provided deadline.

Fundamental errors in published works

It is the authors' responsibility to contact the journal's editors or publisher as soon as they uncover substantial errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, and to work with them to either rectify the manuscript in the form of an erratum or retract the paper. If a third party informs the editors or publisher that a published work has a serious error or inaccuracy, the authors must promptly fix or retract the publication, or give evidence to the journal editors that the paper is correct. Please see https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/jphcfum/page/13150 for rules on retracting or revising publications.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review helps editors make editorial judgments and may help authors improve their submissions through editorial conversations with them. Peer review is an important part of formal scholarly communication and is vital to scientific research.

Promptness

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to examine the research provided in a submission or understands that a prompt evaluation will be impossible should notify the editors as soon as feasible and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted for review are secret documents that must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with anyone else unless the Editor-in-Chief has given permission. This also applies to invited reviewers who decline to participate in the review.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively, with observations and supporting reasons clearly stated so that writers can use them to improve the paper. It is not appropriate to criticize the authors personally.


Acknowledgment of sources

Reviewers should look for relevant published work that the authors haven't included. Any statement that is an observation, derivation, or argument that has already been published should be accompanied by a citation. Any substantial resemblance or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript about which the reviewer has personal information should be reported to the editors.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Any invited referee with conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted. Without the authors' express written authorization, unpublished material provided in a submitted publication may not be used in a reviewer's own study. Confidential information or ideas received through peer review must be kept private and not used for the reviewer's personal gain. This also applies to invited reviewers who decline to participate in the review.

Duties of Editors

Fair play and editorial independence

Without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation, editors evaluate submitted manuscripts solely on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study's validity, clarity) and relevance to the journal's scope. Government policies or the policies of any other agency outside of the magazine have no bearing on the decisions to edit and publish. The Editor-in-Chief has complete control over the journal's editorial content as well as the date of its release.

Confidentiality

Other than the corresponding author, reviewers, possible reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, where appropriate, editors and editorial staff will not divulge any information about a submitted manuscript.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Without the authors' clear written authorization, editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information revealed in a submitted manuscript for their own study. Editors will keep any privileged information or ideas they get as a result of handling the manuscript confidential and will not exploit them for personal gain. Editors will refrain from examining manuscripts in which they have competing, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers; instead, they will delegate the manuscript to another member of the editorial board.

Publication decisions

The editors make sure that all submissions that are being considered for publication are peer-reviewed by at least two experts in the subject. The Editor-in-Chief is in charge of determining which of the papers submitted to the journal will be published, depending on the work's validity, value to researchers and readers, reviewers' comments, and any current legal requirements involving libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. In reaching this choice, the Editor-in-Chief may consult with other editors or reviewers.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

When ethical issues about a submitted manuscript or published publication are highlighted, editors will take appropriate action. Even if it is discovered years after publication, every reported act of unethical publishing behavior will be investigated. If an ethical concern is discovered, the journal will publish a correction, retraction, statement of concern, or another relevant remark.

Duties of the Publisher

Handling of unethical publishing behavior

In cases of claimed or proved scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher will take all necessary steps to clarify the issue and rectify the article in question, working together with the editors. This includes publishing an erratum, clarification, or, in the worst-case scenario, retraction of the relevant work as soon as possible. The publisher, in collaboration with the editors, must take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers containing research misconduct, and must never promote or knowingly allow such misconduct to occur.

Access to journal content

The publisher is dedicated to scholarly research's long-term availability and preservation and ensures accessibility through collaborating with organizations and keeping our own digital archive.