Evliya Çelebi Journal of Political Sciences

This journal provides open access by adopting the principle that the free presentation of scientific research to humanity will increase the global sharing of knowledge.
Articles published in the journal can be freely accessed, read, downloaded, copied, distributed, printed, scanned, linked to full texts, indexed and transferred as data to software without financial, legal and technical barriers, provided that they are cited in accordance with the rules of scientific ethics. The content can be used for any legal purpose; however, in case of commercial use, written permission from the journal is required.
All of the studies published in our journal are available for free and continuous access in our journal archive (https://evliyacelebi.dpu.edu.tr/sites/home/page/36) together with all its annexes.

In Evliya Çelebi Journal of Political Sciences, referees are selected among the experts of the subjects covered in the articles. All selected referees are informed about the responsibilities of the referees and the ethical principles of Evliya Çelebi Journal of Political Sciences, article evaluation criteria and procedure.
- After the referee accepts to be a referee, he/she should take into account the ‘Responsibilities of the referees and ethical principles to be followed’ and ‘Evaluation Processes’ on the system.
- Reviewers should only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the necessary expertise to conduct an appropriate review, can respect the confidentiality of blind peer review, and can keep the details of the manuscript confidential at all times.
- Reviewers invited to review a manuscript are expected to submit their decision to accept or reject the review within 5 days. A referee who has not made a decision by the end of this period is deemed to have rejected the review and a new referee is appointed by the editor. Reviewers who accept the review are expected to submit their opinions within 7 days from the date of acceptance of the invitation. Referees who do not complete the evaluation process within this period are given an additional period of up to 7 days upon the request of the referee. If the arbitrator does not request additional time, a new arbitrator may be appointed.
- Each referee who accepts the referee invitation is asked to fill out an evaluation form and to express his/her acceptance or rejection opinion on the article with concrete reasons.
- In this review form, reviewers are expected to express their opinions on the following issues:
1. Title and Content Consistency
2. Language and Expression of the Article
3. Systematic Compliance with Scientific Criteria
4. Defining the Scope and Conceptual Framework
5. Subject Integrity
6. Defining the Problem
7. Review of Previous Studies (Literature Review)
8. Research Method
9. Presentation, organisation and consistency of information
10. Critical Perspective
11. Access to Primary Sources
12. Access to New Scientific Studies
13. Knowledge of the terminology of the field
14. Originality of the Study
15. Getting Results
16. Coherence of the Arguments Presented and Rational Relevance to Conclusions
17. Contribution to the Field
The referees give an opinion on all these issues by marking one of the options Sufficient, Not Sufficient, Partially Sufficient, Mostly Sufficient. The referees do not need to approve all of these issues for the article to be published. However, suggestions regarding the parts stated as Unsatisfactory and Partially Satisfactory in the evaluation form and other suggestions to the author should be stated in the ‘Note to the Author’ section.
- After completing this form, reviewers can make the following decisions:
 Review Article (Major Correction)
 Revise Article (Minor Correction)
 Deny
 Accept
- If one of the referee evaluation reports is positive and the other is negative, the manuscript is sent to a third referee.
- A single referee report is sufficient to reject an article, but at least two referee reports are required for acceptance.
- If one of the referee evaluations reports ‘Acceptance’ or ‘Minor Revision’ and the other reports ‘Major Revision’ and the editor's opinion is in favour of acceptance of the article, the article is sent to the same referee after the author makes the corrections. The article is rejected or sent to a third referee according to the opinion of the referee who issued the report with the condition of ‘Major Revision’.
- The referee requesting revision may request a re-evaluation of the article after the revision. The referee is given an additional 7 days for this evaluation.
- Data for articles based on field research or data analysis may be requested from the editor by the referee for a proper analysis of the analyses in the article. The journal editor communicates with the author and forwards the data to the referee.
- Reviewers should not have any conflict of interest related to the research, the authors and/or the funders of the research. If a conflict of interest is foreseen, the reviewer should contact the editorial board and indicate a possible conflict of interest. The Conflict of Interest Framework published by COPE (https://publicationethics.org/case/conflict- Interest) will be taken into account in any conflicts of interest that may arise.
- Reviewers cannot use the data of the articles they evaluate before publication and cannot share these data with others.
- The names of the referees who evaluate in the journal are not disclosed to the authors. The information of all referees is published as a list in each issue.

Each uploaded article is firstly scanned by iThenticate plagiarism scanning programme. Articles with a similarity rate of more than 20% are rejected. Manuscripts are evaluated by at least two referees through blind refereeing. The responsibility of the articles published in the journal belongs to the authors. The responsibility of plagiarism and plagiarism within and outside the 20% similarity rate determined in the preliminary control of the article belongs to the authors. Publications should be scientific articles prepared in a cause-effect relationship and should contribute to science. Articles that do not comply with the spelling and format rules are not sent to the referee and are not published. The relevant studies of the authors who do not send the correction text within 30 days are rejected. In Evliya Çelebi Journal of Political Sciences, none of the article submission and publication processes are subject to any charge.
Within the framework of the criterion of ‘ethics committee approval must be obtained separately for clinical and experimental human and animal studies requiring ethics committee decision, this approval must be specified and documented in the article.’, which ULAKBIM / TR Index made mandatory in 2020, ethics committee approval for qualitative and quantitative field research with human and animal samples should be given as an attachment to the article and it should be stated that ethical rules are followed by specifying the date and number of the document in the method section of the article.
Attention is paid to the compliance of the studies submitted to the journal with Research and Publication Ethics. Compliance with ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) recommendations and COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) international standards for editors and authors is required.
ETHICAL PRINCIPLES AND RULES FOR AUTHORS
- Articles submitted to Evliya Çelebi Journal of Political Sciences must be original studies in the fields of social sciences.
- All sources used in the articles should be cited correctly and appropriately.
- The articles submitted to Evliya Çelebi Journal of Political Sciences must not have been submitted to another journal and Evliya Çelebi Journal of Political Sciences Copyright Transfer Form must be filled.
- Persons who do not contribute intellectually to the article should not be included as authors.
- Conflicts of interest regarding the submitted article should be clearly stated and the reason should be clearly stated.
- Authors may be asked to submit raw data about their work to the editorial board while it is in the refereeing process, in which case authors may be expected to share their raw data with the editorial board. Authors are obliged to keep the data related to a published article for 5 years.
- Authors should inform the editor and the editorial board when they detect an error in their work. They should carry out the correction or withdrawal processes in co-operation with the editors.
ETHICAL PRINCIPLES AND RULES FOR REFEREES
All articles submitted to Evliya Çelebi Journal of Political Sciences are evaluated through a double blind review process. Double blind reviewing means that the authors are kept confidential from the referees and the referees are kept confidential from the authors in order to ensure an unbiased, objective and independent evaluation process. The referees make their decisions on the contribution of the article to the main publication areas of Evliya Çelebi Journal of Political Sciences and whether the article is publishable or not by filling out the form sent to them through the system. The ethical responsibilities of academicians working as referees in Evliya Çelebi Journal of Political Sciences are as follows:
- Referees should pay attention to refereeing articles related to their fields of expertise.
- Referees should inform the editors that they cannot evaluate studies that may have a conflict of interest.
- Reviewers should evaluate the articles impartially.
- Reviewers are required to fill in the online Article Evaluation Form for the articles they evaluate. Referees should express their opinions about the article they evaluate in the article evaluation form with justification.
- Referees should avoid using a language that may offend the authors in their article evaluations, on the contrary, the style they use in their suggestions should be scientific. In case of a negative situation, editors can contact the referee and request them to review and correct their comments.
- Reviewers are required to complete their evaluations by complying with ethical responsibilities within the time given to them.
ETHICAL PRINCIPLES AND RULES FOR EDITOR(S)
Editors are obliged to fulfil the ethical responsibilities in the ‘COPE Guide to Ethical Behaviour and Best Practices for Journal Editors’ published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The ethical duties and responsibilities of editors are as follows:
- The editor is obliged to endeavour to improve the quality of the journal and contribute to its development.
- The editor is required to support the freedom of expression of the authors.
- The editor should ensure that the sections of the journal where peer review is not required (letters to the editor, invited papers, conference announcements, etc.) are clearly indicated.
- The editor should endeavour to ensure that the articles published are compatible with the knowledge and skills of the journal's readers.
- The editor should ask the referees to evaluate the articles in accordance with their knowledge and expertise. Thus, it should be ensured that the articles are appropriately evaluated by experts in their fields.
- The editor is obliged to require reviewers to declare that they have no conflicts of interest before evaluating an article.
- The editor should communicate to the referees all the necessary information about the referee evaluation process and what the referees are expected to do
- The editor should ensure that the peer-review process is conducted in a double blind review process and should not disclose authors to reviewers and reviewers to authors. - The editor should evaluate reviewers based on their timeliness and performance.
- The editor should create a database of reviewers and update the database according to the performance of the reviewers.
- The editor should remove reviewers who make rude and offensive comments or return late from the reviewer list.
- The editor should constantly renew and expand the referee list according to the referees' areas of expertise. - The editor should continuously update the publication and writing rules and the sample template for authors on what is expected of them.
- The editor should evaluate the manuscripts submitted to the journal in terms of the journal's editorial rules, the importance and originality of the work, and if he/she decides to reject the manuscript during the first submission process, he/she should clearly and impartially communicate the reasons to the authors. In this process, if it is decided that the article needs to be revised in terms of grammar, punctuation and/or spelling rules (margins, proper referencing, etc.), the authors should be informed about this and they should be given time to make the necessary corrections.
- Manuscripts should include the dates of submission and acceptance for publication.
- When authors request information about the status of their manuscripts, the authors should be informed about the status of their manuscripts without disturbing the double blind review process.
- The final decision on articles submitted to the journal for publication belongs to the editorial board. The editorial board is responsible for determining the articles to be published in the journal within objective and academic criteria.
- The editor should inform the members of the editorial board about the publication and writing rules and explain what is expected of them.
- The editor should communicate the most up-to-date version of the publication and writing rules to the members of the editorial board.
- The editor should evaluate the members of the editorial board and elect members who will actively participate in the development of the journal to the editorial board.
- The editor should inform the members of the editorial board about the following roles and responsibilities:
-To support the development of the magazine
-Writing compilations related to their field of specialisation when requested to do so
- To review and improve publication and writing rules
- To fulfil the necessary responsibilities in the operation of the journal
PLAGIARISM AND UNETHICAL BEHAVIOUR
All articles submitted to Evliya Çelebi Journal of Political Sciences are scanned with any plagiarism software programme before publication. Articles with a similarity rate of 20% or less are accepted for publication. Articles exceeding this rate are examined in detail and if deemed necessary, they are sent back to the authors for revision or correction, and if plagiarism or unethical behaviour is detected, publication is rejected.
Some unethical behaviours are listed below:
- Identification of persons who did not contribute intellectually to the study as authors,
- Failure to acknowledge the intellectual contributors to the study as authors,
- Failure to indicate if the article is derived from a master's/doctoral thesis or a project,
- Slicing, i.e. publishing more than one article from a single study,
- Failure to declare conflicts of interest regarding submitted manuscripts,
- Deciphering the process of double blind refereeing,

Ethics Committee Permission Certificate
As of 2020, the TR Index Journal Evaluation criteria have been updated and the articles regarding the requirement of ethics committee permission in scientific research have been regulated in detail. In this context, studies requiring ethics committee permission are listed below.
When uploading a study to our journal, you must add your ethics committee permission document to the system together with your article file. If your study is within the scope of research that does not require ethics committee approval, you must sign and submit the relevant declaration form and clearly state this in the text of the article.

Research Requiring Ethics Committee Authorisation
- Qualitative or quantitative research conducted with data collection methods such as questionnaires, interviews, focus group studies, observations, experiments, interviews,
- Studies in which humans and animals (including material or data) are used for experimental or scientific purposes,
- Clinical trials conducted on humans,
- Scientific studies on animals,
- Retrospective studies within the framework of the personal data protection law.

Important Issues Related to Ethics Committee Authorisation
- In case presentations, it should be stated that an ‘Informed Consent Form’ has been obtained from the participants.
- For the use of materials such as scales, questionnaires, photographs belonging to others, permission must be obtained from their owners and this issue must be clearly stated.
- It should be stated that the copyright regulations regarding the intellectual and artistic works used are complied with.
- For articles using research data from before 2020, produced from master's or doctoral studies (and specified in the article), or submitted to the journal in the previous year, accepted but not yet published, retrospective ethics committee permission is not required.
- Non-university researchers can also apply to the Ethics Committees in their regions.
- In articles to be published in journals, it should be stated whether ethics committee permission and/or legal or special permission is required. If permission is required, it should be clearly presented from which institution, on which date and with which decision or number number the relevant permission was obtained.
- If human or animal subjects are used in the study, it should be declared that the relevant research was carried out in accordance with international declarations and guidelines.

Studies Requiring Ethics Committee Authorisation and Accepted for Publication
For studies requiring ethics committee authorisation, the authorisation information (name, date and number of the committee) should be specified in the ‘Methods’ section of the article and should also be included on the first or last page of the article.
Frequently Asked Questions
QUESTION 1: Is it mandatory to obtain ethics committee approval for all articles?
Answer no. Ethics committee approval is only required for certain studies. Studies that require ethics committee permission are as follows:
1. Qualitative or quantitative research conducted with data collection methods such as questionnaires, interviews, focus group studies, observations, experiments, interviews,
2. Studies in which humans and animals (including materials/data) are used for experimental or scientific purposes,
3. Clinical research on humans,
4. Scientific studies on animals,
5. Retrospective studies within the framework of the personal data protection law.
Also;
- Stating that the ‘Informed Consent Form’ has been obtained in case presentations,
- Obtaining permission from the owners for the use of materials such as scales, questionnaires, photographs belonging to others,
- It should be stated that the copyright regulations regarding the intellectual and artistic works used are complied with.
QUESTION 2: Should retrospective ethics committee permission be obtained for publications produced from research and theses completed in previous years?
Prior to 2020, retrospective ethics committee permission is not required for articles using research data from the previous year, produced from master's or doctoral studies (and specified in the article), applied for publication to the journal in the previous year, accepted but not yet published.
QUESTION 3: Do these rules of the TR Index impose restrictions on publications made outside the university?

No. They do not. Non-university researchers can also apply to the Ethics Committees in their own regions and obtain the necessary permissions.

No fee is charged to the author or his/her institution under any name.
Evliya Çelebi Journal of Political Sciences does not charge any fee for submission, evaluation and publication of articles. Authors do not pay any article processing fee or submission fee for the manuscripts they send to the journal.