PEYZAJ Journal follows the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers. The ethical responsibilities of editors, authors and the publisher are listed below.

Editors' Duties

Impartiality and Independence

Editors evaluate the publications submitted to the journal based on their academic merit (the importance and contribution of the study to the field, originality, appropriateness of the findings and methods, and clarity of language) and their relevance to the scope of the journal. Gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religious belief, political opinion or the institution of study are not taken into account in the evaluation of the publications. At the same time, government policies or the policies of any external institution are not taken into account in the evaluation of a publication. The journal editor has full authority to determine the entire content of the journal and when it will be published.

PEYZAJ Journal and its editors are responsible for evaluating the publications only in terms of their academic merit, i.e. importance in their field, originality of the article, validity of the research and clarity of language. The only criterion for evaluating a publication is its relevance to the journal's scope. The authors' race, gender, religious beliefs, political philosophy and/or institution do not play a role in the decision-making process.

Confidentiality

Editors and the editorial team cannot share any information about a submitted publication with anyone other than the author(s), referees, editorial assistants and the publisher. The decision to meet with the aforementioned persons belongs solely to the Editor.

Conflicts of interest

Editors and editorial board members cannot use information contained in works in the publication process (including their own works and works still in progress) for their own benefit without the explicit consent of the author(s).

Editors will assign another member of the editorial board to conduct the preliminary review and evaluation stages of the publication(s) in cases where there are conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions.

Publication decisions

Editors and the publisher send all submitted works for publication to at least three expert referees for evaluation. After the review process is completed, the Editor-in-Chief decides which works to publish, taking into account the accuracy of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, referee reports and legal regulations such as copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may also seek advice from other editors or referees when making this decision.

Ensuring publication integrity

Editors, together with the Publisher, ensure that any reported unethical conduct will be investigated, even if years have passed since the date of publication. Journal editors will follow COPE procedures in such suspected cases. Following investigation, if unethical conduct is proven, they should publish a statement indicating that there was an error, inconsistency or misdirection related to the relevant publication..

Duties of Referees

Contribution to publication decisions

Anonymous refereeing processes directly affect the quality of academic publications. The evaluation process is carried out with the principle of anonymous refereeing. Referees cannot directly contact authors, and evaluations and referee reports are sent through the journal management system. During this process, evaluation forms and referee reports are sent to the author(s) through the editors. Anonymous refereeing helps editors make decisions in dialogue with authors. At the same time, authors have the opportunity to develop their work by obtaining important information about their work.

Promptness

A referee who is invited to conduct a peer review should inform the editor as soon as possible whether he/she will be a referee for the relevant study.

Confidentiality

Works sent to referees for evaluation should be considered as confidential documents. Works should not be shown to others, and their content should not be discussed. If necessary, referees may seek advice from other colleagues with the permission of the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief can only grant this permission in exceptional circumstances. The confidentiality rule also covers people who refuse to serve as referees.

Principle of Impartiality

There should be no personal criticism towards the authors during the evaluation process. Evaluations should be made objectively and in a way that contributes to the development of the studies.

Citing Sources

Referees are obliged to inform the authors if there are any citations that are not stated as references in the study. Referees should pay particular attention to works that are not cited in the field or citations that conflict with similar works. Referees should inform the editors if they notice publications that are similar to any previously published work or information.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Referees should not accept to evaluate if they have any collaborative connection with any author, company or institution whose work they are assigned to evaluate and they should inform the editors of the situation.

Referees cannot use unpublished works or parts of works sent for evaluation in their own studies without the written consent of the author(s). Information and ideas obtained during the evaluation should be kept confidential by the referees and should not be used for their own interests. These rules also cover people who do not accept the duty of being a referee.

Authors' Duties

Reporting

In original research studies, the author(s) must clearly state how the study was conducted and its importance, and present the results objectively. The study should be described in detail to enable other researchers to conduct similar studies, and the necessary resources that can be used should be indicated. Review articles should be accurate, objective, and comprehensive, and editorial opinions and other subjective ideas should be clearly stated. Untrue or intentionally misrepresented statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data access and storage

Authors should make the raw data of their research (if the data is available for presentation) and the editorial edition of their articles publicly available upon request. If necessary, authors should keep their data accessible to other researchers for at least 10 years after the publication date of their study (preferably through an institutional or corporate data repository or a data center). However; the confidentiality of the participants should be protected and their legal rights regarding their personal information should be taken into consideration.

Originality and plagiarism

Authors should only publish their original work and properly cite the sources and data they use. They should also cite other publications that are effective in determining the quality of their work. There are different types of plagiarism: presenting another researcher's work as their own, copying a section of another researcher's work without citing the work or using it in a different way as if it were their own, or claiming the results of another study as your own. Plagiarism in any form is against publishing ethics and is unacceptable.

Every submitted article is scanned for plagiarism using a similarity program. In this scan, references and citations are excluded. Articles with a scan result of 20% or more are rejected and are not accepted again even if changes are made. 20% is not a criterion for editors; they reserve the right to reject the article and/or request corrections if they see any. This situation is left to the evaluation of the editor-in-chief, provided that it is stated in the article that it was produced from the thesis in the article in the master's and doctoral theses. The 20% requirement is not required for articles produced from theses.

Multiple, duplicate or simultaneous submissions / publications

Articles containing the same study in essence should not be published in more than one journal or other publication outlet. Therefore, authors should not submit a study previously published in another journal for evaluation to another journal. Submitting an article to more than one journal at the same time is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

It may be possible for some articles (such as clinical guidelines, translations) to be published in several journals under certain conditions. Authors and editors of the relevant journals must agree that the study may be published in another journal. The data and discussions of the study published in a second journal should be the same as in the previously published journal. The first journal published must be cited.

Definition of Authorship

Authors are deemed to have taken all responsibilities related to the publication. For this reason, only those who meet the criteria for authorship should be considered as authors of the study. These criteria can be listed as follows: (I) having made significant contributions to the content, design, data collection process or analysis/interpretation of the study (II) having made intellectual contributions to the creation and editing of the content (III) having seen, approved and accepted the final version of the study. Individuals who have made significant contributions to the study (such as technical assistance, writing and editing assistance, and support) but do not meet the authorship criteria should not be listed as authors; these individuals should be included in the "Acknowledgements" section after their written permissions have been obtained. Obtaining the written permission they have obtained. The corresponding author guarantees that all authors who have contributed to the study are included in the author list and that these authors have seen the final version of the study and approved that there is no problem in its publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Authors should state at the earliest possible stage (usually by sending an information form during the application and adding a statement to the article) that there is no conflict of interest that could affect the results of the study or the interpretations. Possible conflicts of interest; grants, scholarships and other payments may be financial, such as memberships, employment, consultancy, stock ownership, expert opinion grants or patent-licensing agreements, or non-financial, such as personal or professional connections, memberships, information or opinions related to the study. All financial sources related to the study (including the grant number or other reference number, if any) should be stated.

Citing sources

Authors should always state the sources they use in the study and the sources they refer to when deciding on the nature of the study. Information obtained personally (conversations, correspondence or interviews with third parties) should not be used without written permission from the source. Authors should not use personal documents such as referee documents or grant applications without written permission from their owners.

Human and animal rights

If the study involves chemical substances or methods and equipment that may cause various harms when used, these substances, methods and equipment should be clearly stated in the article. If the study involves subjects and guinea pigs, authors should perform all procedures performed in the study in accordance with the relevant laws and institutional guidelines and should have received approval from the relevant committees/organizations. There should also be a statement about these in the article. Authors should also state that in studies conducted on humans, the necessary permissions have been obtained for the study to be conducted with subjects. The confidentiality rights of the participants should not be violated.

Peer review process

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and respond to the editors' requests for raw data, explanations and ethical approval documents, patient consent and copyright permissions as soon as possible.

If the referees have decided to "correct and resubmit/revise", the authors must systematically make all the corrections requested from them and resubmit their work before the deadline.

Basic errors in published works

Find a significant error or mistake in a published work is primarily the author(s)'s duty. If such a problem occurs, the author(s) are obliged to immediately notify the journal's editors or publisher and, in cooperation with the editor/publisher, to correct the error (typographical error) or withdraw the publication. If the editor(s) or publisher learn from a third party that the work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, the authors are obliged to promptly correct or retract the article, or to prove the accuracy of the work to the journal editors.

Duties of the Publisher

In case of ethical violation

PEYZAJ Journal will take the necessary measures to clarify the situation and change the article in question in case of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism. This will be done in agreement with the editors of the issue in question.

The measures to be taken will include, but are not limited to, stating that there is a typographical error, making an explanation and, in very serious cases, retracting the article. PEYZAJ Journal undertakes to take the necessary measures to prevent the publication of articles containing academic misconduct.

Access to the journal content

The publisher undertakes to provide open access to the journal; therefore, it is deemed to have accepted the duty to make all parts of the published content permanently and freely accessible to the academic community worldwide. The publisher does not charge any material or moral fees for the processing of the articles during the submission process and for their printing. The publisher undertakes to make the journal content available for continuous and free use.

Archiving and Preservation of Publications

The publisher performs the archiving and preservation of online content using Lockss through Dergipark.