Ethical Principles and Publication Policy
All researchers planning to submit an article to the Social Sciences Electronic Journal (SBEdergi) are required to carefully review the following information.
Publication Ethics Principles
At SBEdergi, we consider it a fundamental principle for all stakeholders to fully adhere to their ethical responsibilities during the publication processes of peer-reviewed articles supporting scientific methodology. The application of ethical rules establishes a foundation for the development and dissemination of knowledge in an impartial, reputable, and reliable manner.
All articles submitted to our journal are expected to comply with the following responsibilities within the framework of publication ethics:
Ethics Committee Approval:
Ethics committee approval must be obtained for all research in scientific fields requiring ethical clearance.
Copyright:
The copyright of articles submitted to our journal must be transferred to the journal before the publication process begins.
Peer Review Process:
Peer-reviewed articles are fundamental works that embody and support scientific methodology. In this process, it is crucial for all stakeholders, including authors, readers, researchers, publishers, reviewers, and editors, to act in accordance with ethical principles.
Ethical Guidance:
For scientific articles submitted to SBEdergi, the Higher Education Council’s Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive and the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) must be taken into consideration. In cases of suspected violations of publication ethics, SBEdergi follows the Publication Ethics Flowcharts developed by COPE.
Ethical Principles:
The publication processes applied in SBEdergi directly reflect the quality of authors' work and their scientific contributions. These processes aim to create a scientific environment that is impartial and adheres to high standards.
The journal’s publication ethics principles encourage all stakeholders, including authors, readers, researchers, publishers, reviewers, and editors, to fulfill their scientific responsibilities. Compliance with ethical rules is seen as a necessity for ensuring the reliability and quality of scientific studies in SBEdergi.
Publication Policy
SBEdergi operates with a commitment to ethical responsibilities and manages its publication processes transparently and reliably. Published biannually (in June and December) as an open-access, electronic journal, SBEdergi aims to facilitate access to scientific information. Additionally, special issues may be published with the decision of the Editorial Board.
Articles submitted to our journal are initially subjected to a preliminary evaluation by the Editorial Board. Articles that do not align with the journal’s scope or fail to meet scientific writing standards in terms of content and format may be rejected or revisions may be requested. Articles deemed suitable for publication principles are subjected to a peer-review process.
The peer review process involves at least two independent reviewers, with the double-blind review technique applied to ensure anonymity of authors and reviewers throughout the process. Articles that do not receive positive evaluations from reviewers are not published. Articles requiring revisions based on reviewer feedback are returned to the responsible author for necessary amendments. The corrected manuscript must be resubmitted within the specified time frame.
Accepted articles are published in an issue determined by the editor(s). Authors have the right to withdraw their work during the preliminary review phase. The views and opinions expressed in the articles are solely the responsibility of the authors. Papers previously presented at scientific congresses and symposiums can be submitted to the journal, provided this is explicitly stated. Articles submitted to the journal must not have been published elsewhere or submitted for publication. No fees are charged to authors for published articles. Submissions that fail to meet publication rules or are incomplete are not considered for evaluation.
Authors’ Ethical Responsibilities
Authors must guarantee that their manuscripts are free from plagiarism and are their original work.
Proper references must be provided for all citations used in the manuscript.
Manuscripts are checked using plagiarism detection software, and only those with a similarity rate of 20% or below are considered for evaluation.
Authors must ensure that only those who have made scientific contributions to the manuscript are included in the author list.
The author list and order must be determined carefully before submission and cannot be changed after publication.
Research findings must be presented accurately, clearly, and honestly without falsification, errors, or inappropriate data manipulation.
Authors are responsible for adhering to ethical principles during the manuscript process and providing access to datasets when necessary.
Authors must address corrections indicated in reviewer feedback promptly.
Ethics committee approval must be obtained for research requiring such authorization. These include studies involving surveys, focus groups, observations, experiments, interviews, clinical research on humans, and retrospective studies under the Personal Data Protection Law.
Informed consent must be documented for studies involving informed volunteers. Additionally, permissions must be obtained for using others' scales, surveys, or visuals, and this must be explicitly stated in the manuscript.
Authors must disclose any financial or personal conflicts of interest that could affect the manuscript, including employment, consultancy, stock ownership, patent applications, and funding sources.
Authors must avoid discriminatory language based on gender, race, language, religion, culture, class, age, ideology, affiliation, or sexual orientation.
Authors are obliged to transparently declare all potential conflicts of interest to ensure the reliability of the study and adherence to scientific ethical principles.
Reviewers’ Ethical Responsibilities
SBEdergi employs a double-blind review system, ensuring the confidentiality of the identities of authors and reviewers. Reviewers are expected to adhere to the following ethical guidelines during the evaluation process:
Reviewers should only agree to evaluate manuscripts within their area of expertise.
Evaluations must focus on the manuscript’s content and be free from bias related to nationality, gender, religion, or political beliefs.
Confidentiality must be maintained, and manuscript and evaluation details must not be shared with third parties.
Reviewers should decline to evaluate manuscripts in cases of conflicts of interest and notify the editor.
Any instances of plagiarism or other ethical violations must be reported to the editor immediately.
Feedback must be constructive and in line with academic standards; personal or aggressive comments should be avoided.
Reviewers must allocate sufficient time for the evaluation process and meet the specified deadlines.
Editors’ Ethical Responsibilities
Editors are responsible for maintaining the academic integrity of the journal and ensuring the quality of published works. Manuscripts are only accepted if they contribute to the literature, readers, and researchers and are of original and high-quality content. Editorial decisions are independent of external institutions or individuals.
Editors’ responsibilities include:
Evaluating manuscripts solely based on intellectual content, regardless of the authors’ race, religion, gender, age, ethnicity, political beliefs, or other personal characteristics.
Assigning manuscripts to appropriate field editors and reviewers to ensure an impartial review process.
Ensuring the peer-review process is fair, unbiased, and timely, while maintaining an updated reviewer pool.
Protecting the intellectual property rights of published articles and defending authors’ rights against violations.
Considering potential conflicts of interest among authors, reviewers, and other editors to guarantee an independent and impartial publication process.
Rejecting manuscripts with issues such as plagiarism, lack of originality, copyright infringement, or non-compliance with legal requirements without initiating the review process.
Prioritizing the protection of human and animal rights, verifying that ethics committee approvals and informed consents have been obtained for relevant studies.
Manuscript Evaluation Process
Articles submitted to the journal are initially reviewed by the editor to ensure all required documents (manuscript, cover page, and similarity report) are complete and accurate. If the submission is incomplete, it is returned to the author. If complete, the manuscript undergoes a second evaluation to determine compliance with the journal’s publication policies. Non-compliant submissions are rejected.
Compliant manuscripts are then assessed based on publication principles, writing guidelines, abstracts, and references. Authors are required to address any identified deficiencies and resubmit the corrected manuscript within the given timeframe.
Manuscripts passing all these stages are sent to two reviewers for scientific evaluation. If both reviewers provide positive feedback, the manuscript proceeds to the publication stage. In cases where one reviewer provides positive feedback and the other negative, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer. If the third reviewer’s feedback is also negative, the manuscript is rejected. If positive, the final decision regarding publication is made by the editor.
Accepted manuscripts are included in the nearest issue scheduled for publication. If there is no available space in the current issue, the manuscript is deferred to the next issue. Authors retain the right to withdraw their submissions at any stage but must notify the journal in such cases.
The entire process, from submission to publication approval, typically takes 3-4 months.