Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

ETHICAL PRINCIPLES

The Journal of Social Perspective Studies (JSPS) undertakes to carry out publication ethics to the highest standards and comply with the Publication Ethics and Abuse Statement principles. 

• Manuscripts submitted to the journal for publication should not have been previously published in another journal (including papers presented at scientific meetings and published in full text) or should not have been sent to any journal simultaneously for publication.
• Manuscripts sent to the journal are included in the double-blind peer review processafter being reviewed by an editor and at least two referees. The right is reserved that the submitted articles can be examined for plagiarism at any stage by means of purpose-built software. Articles submitted to the journal are regularly scanned by various software (ihenticate, turnitin) to prevent plagiarism.For this purpose, articles that do not comply with the standards and are subject to plagiarism, unauthorized quotations or false data, forgery (the fabrication or manipulation of table figures or research data), and the use of inappropriate human or animal material in the research are not published in the journal. This rule also applies if the standard and its non-compliance are detected at the post-publishing stage and requires the article to be withdrawn from publication. Our journal reminds us of its responsibility to report cases of suspicion of plagiarism or double publication, as required by publication ethics.
  The publishing processes implemented in The JSPS form the basis for the development and distribution of information impartially and respectably. The processes carried out in this direction are directly reflected in the quality of the authors' work and the institutions that support the authors. Peer-reviewed studies are studies that embody and support the scientific method. All stakeholders of the process (authors, readers and researchers, publisher, referees and editors) must comply with the standards for ethical principles. Within the scope of publication ethics, all stakeholders are expected by our journal to bear the following ethical responsibilities.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE EDITORS

Editors are responsible for every publication published in the journal. In the context of this responsibility, editors have the following roles and responsibilities:

• Strive to meet the information needs of readers and authors
• Ensuring continuous improvement of the journal
• Conducting processes to improve the quality of studies published in the journal
• Supporting freedom of thought
• Ensuring academic integrity
• Continuing business processes without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards
• Demonstrating openness and transparency in publication on issues requiring correction and clarification.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE REFEREES

Evaluation of all studies with "Blind Refereeing" directly affects the quality of the publication. In this process, the objective and independent evaluation of the publication creates trust. The JSPS evaluation process is carried out with the principle of double-blind refereeing. Referees cannot directly communicate with authors; evaluations and comments are submitted through the journal management system. In this process, reviewer comments on evaluation forms and full texts are forwarded to the author(s) through the editor. In this context, it is expected that the reviewers evaluating the work for our journal will have the following ethical responsibilities:

• Accept to evaluate only studies related to their field of expertise.
• Evaluation should be done with impartiality and confidentiality.
• If (s)he thinks she faces a conflict of interest during the evaluation process, (s)he should refuse to review the study and inform the journal editor.
• In accordance with the principle of confidentiality, they should destroy the studies they have examined after the evaluation process. They can only use the final versions of the studies they have reviewed after they are published.
• Make the evaluation objectively only in relation to the content of the study. Nationality, gender, religious beliefs, political beliefs and commercial concerns should not be allowed to influence the evaluation.
• Make the assessment in constructive and courteous language. Do not make derogatory personal comments that include hostility, slander and insults.
• They should perform the work they accept to evaluate in a timely manner and with the above ethical responsibilities.

AUTHORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES

The author(s) who submit a study to the JSPS are expected to comply with the following ethical responsibilities:

• The works submitted by the author(s) are expected to be original. If the author(s) benefit from or use other works, they are required to cite completely and accurately.
• People who do not contribute to the content intellectually in the creation of the work should not be specified as authors.
• Situations and relationships that may constitute a conflict of interest, if any, of all studies submitted for publication should be disclosed.
• Raw data regarding their articles can be requested from the author(s) within the framework of the evaluation processes; in such a case, the author(s) should be ready to present the expected data and information to the editorial board and scientific committee.
• The author(s) must have a document showing that they have the right to use the data used, the necessary permissions for the research/analysis, or the consent of the experimental subjects.
• In case the author(s) notices an error in their published, early appearance or evaluation phase, they must cooperate with the editor in informing, correcting or withdrawing the journal editor or publisher.
• Authors cannot have their work in the application process of more than one journal simultaneously. Each application can be started following the completion of the previous application. The work published in another journal cannot be sent.
• It cannot be proposed to change the author responsibilities of a work whose evaluation process has begun (Adding an author, changing the order of authors, removing an author, etc.).

RELATIONS WITH THE READER

Editors should make decisions by considering the knowledge, skills and experience expectations of all readers, researchers and practitioners. Attention should be paid to the fact that the published studies contribute to the reader, researcher, practitioner and scientific literature and are original. In addition, editors are obliged to consider the feedback from readers, researchers and practitioners and to provide explanatory and informative feedback.

RELATIONS WITH THE AUTHOR

The duties and responsibilities of the editors to the authors are as follows:

• Editors should make a positive or negative decision based on the importance, original value, validity, clarity of the narrative, and the journal's goals and objectives.
• Studies that are suitable for the scope of publication should be included in the preliminary evaluation stage unless there are other serious problems.
• Editors should not ignore positive referee suggestions unless there are contradictions to the academic writing and publication rules about the study.
• New editors should not change the decisions made by the previous editor(s) for studies unless there is a valid problem.
• "Blind Refereeing and Evaluation Process" must be published, and the editors must prevent deviations from the defined processes.
• Editors should publish an "Author's Guide" that includes every subject the authors expect from them in detail. These guides should be updated periodically.
• Authors should be informed and returned in an explanatory and informative way.

RELATIONS WITH THE REFEREES

The duties and responsibilities of the editors towards the referees are as follows:

• The referees should be determined in accordance with the subject of the study.
• The editors are responsible for providing the information and guides that the referees will need during the evaluation phase.
• Editors have to consider whether there is a conflict of interest between the authors and the referees.
• In the context of blind refereeing, the identity of the referees should be kept confidential.
• Editors should encourage reviewers to evaluate the work in an impartial, scientific and objective language.
• Referees should be evaluated with criteria such as timely return and performance.
• Editors should determine practices and policies that increase the performance of referees.
• Editors should take the necessary steps to update the referee pool dynamically.
• Editors should prevent rude and unscientific evaluations.
• Editors should take steps to ensure that the referee pool is broad.

RELATIONS WITH THE EDITORIAL BOARD

• Editors must ensure that all members of the editorial board advance the processes in accordance with editorial policies and guidelines.
• The editorial board should inform its members about the publishing policies and keep them informed of the developments.
• New editorial board members should be trained on editorial policies and should provide the information they need.
• It should ensure that the members of the editorial board evaluate the work impartially and independently.
• New editorial board members should be determined as contributing and suitable.
• The members of the editorial board should send studies suitable for their field of expertise for evaluation.
• They must regularly interact with the editorial board.
• It should hold regular meetings with the editorial board for the development of publication policies and the journal.

Editorial and blind peer review processes

Editors are obliged to implement the "Blind Refereeing and Evaluation Process" policies included in the journal's publication policies. In this context, the editors ensure that the fair, impartial and timely evaluation process of each work is completed.

Quality assurance

Editors are responsible for publishing every article published in the journal in accordance with journal publication policies and international standards.

The ethics committee approval

Editors are responsible for refusing the study lacking the Ethics committee approval for the subjects used in the studies or in the absence of permission for experimental research. In observation and interview-based studies, it is important to obtain the explicit consent of the participants through a written statement. It is an important ethical principle to obtain parental consent in studies conducted with underage participants.

Precaution against possible abuse and misconduct

Editors are obliged to take precautions against possible abuse and misconduct. It is among the responsibilities of the editor to share the relevant findings, as well as to carry out a rigorous and objective investigation regarding the identification and evaluation of complaints regarding this situation.

Ensuring academic publication integrity

Editors should ensure that judgments containing errors, inconsistencies or misdirection in studies are promptly corrected. Editors; is obliged to implement the "Blind Refereeing and Evaluation Process" policies included in the journal's publication policies. In this context, the editors ensure that the fair, impartial and timely evaluation process of each work is completed.

Protection of intellectual property rights

Editors are obliged to protect the intellectual property rights of all published articles and to defend the rights of the journal and the author(s) in case of possible violations. In addition, the editors are obliged to take the necessary measures so that the contents of all published articles do not violate the intellectual property rights of other publications.

Constructiveness and openness to discussion

Editors

• should take into account the persuasive criticisms of the studies published in the journal and display a constructive attitude towards these criticisms.
• should give the right to reply to the author(s) of the criticized studies.
• should not ignore or exclude studies with negative results.

Complaints

Editors are obliged to carefully examine the complaints from the authors, referees or readers and respond in an enlightening and explanatory manner.

Political and Commercial Concerns

The journal owner, publisher and no other political or commercial factors affect the editors' independent decision making.

Conflicts of interest

Editors take into account the conflicts of interest among the author(s), referees and other editors and ensure that the publication process of the studies is completed independently and impartially.

ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PUBLISHER

• The Board of Directors of the Journal acts with the awareness of its ethical responsibilities:
• Editors are responsible for all processes of the works submitted to the journal. In this context, the decision-makers are the editors, regardless of economic or political gains.
• It undertakes to create an independent editorial decision.
• The JSPS protects the property and copyright of every published article and undertakes to keep a record of every published copy.
• It has the responsibility to take precautions against all kinds of scientific abuse, citation fraud and plagiarism regarding the editors.

In case you face an Unethical Situation

If you encounter unethical behaviour or content other than the ethical responsibilities mentioned above in our journal, please send an e-mail from the contact section.

Journal Policy

The JSPS does not charge any submission or publication fees from authors. The evaluation period of the articles sent to the journal is three (3) months on average. Submitted articles are sent to two blind referees after preliminary checks. The requests from the referees are forwarded to the author via the system, and they are asked to make the relevant corrections within the specified time.