Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

Journal Publication Policy

The Journal of Academic Opinion (JAO) is an internationally peer-reviewed journal and is published electronically twice a year (June and December).

Studies such as research and review articles, conference reports and book reviews are published in JAO.

Studies to be sent to JAO must be an original study that will fill a gap in the field or a review that evaluates previously published studies and reveals new and noteworthy views on the subject.

The opinions expressed in the studies published in JAO are the author(s') own opinion, not the journal's opinion. In addition, the scientific and legal responsibility of the articles belongs to the author(s).

No copyright is paid to the works sent to JAO and no fee is charged from the author(s). The copyright of published works is transferred to the Journal of Academic Opinion. Author(s) must fill out and submit a "Copyright Form" for journal articles.

Studies submitted to JAO must not have been published anywhere before and must not have been submitted to another platform for publication. Papers presented at a scientific meeting can be sent to the journal for publication, provided that the presentation information (name, place, date, etc. of the congress) is clearly stated.

Studies sent to JAO will be sent electronically from the journal's website. After the study in question is submitted, developments regarding the referee process and referee evaluation reports will be communicated to the author(s) via e-mail by the editorial board.

Each study sent to JAO is first subjected to a preliminary review by the editor during the evaluation process, taking into account the scope and other requirements, including Turkish and English abstracts, spelling rules and compliance with the journal article template. As a result of the review, the study that is not suitable for evaluation is returned to the author(s). As a result of the preliminary review, the study is deemed appropriate and the double-blind peer-review process is initiated. In this process, the relevant study is sent to two independent referees who are experts in their field for peer review within the framework of ethical principles. The names of the author(s) and referees are kept confidential during the refereeing process. Referees are given 15 days to review and evaluate the study. According to the results of the referee evaluations, a decision is made to accept, revise or reject the publication of the study in the journal. If the study is rejected by both referees, the evaluation process is concluded with a rejection decision. However, if one of the referees rejects and the other decides to accept or revise, the rejected work is sent to a third referee for review. The final decision on the article is made after the third review. If the study is sent back for revision, the author(s) will revise and send the revised study within 15 days. The editor and/or referees re-evaluate the study, examine whether their suggestions have been implemented, and if revision is deemed necessary, the editor sends the study back to the author and re-evaluates. Finally, the editor decides whether to accept the work. The editor informs the author(s) about every step of this process. If information or raw data regarding their work is requested from the author(s) during the evaluation process, the expected information must be provided to the editor(s).

Studies sent to JAO must be prepared following ethical rules and references made in the text must be stated. The similarity rate of the study should be submitted to the editorial board in a report by the author(s). The upper limit of acceptable similarity rate is 20%. The report should be prepared excluding equations and a bibliography.

The editorial board has the right to check similarities during the evaluation process and request corrections accordingly. If it is determined that the similarity rate is much higher than the upper limit, the work in question is rejected by the editorial board.

The editorial board may use various "plagiarism checking" software or programs (such as Turnitin and iThenticate) to check the originality of the submitted works.

Suppose plagiarism is detected by both the referees and the editorial board at any stage of the submission (before or after acceptance, at any stage before publication). In that case, the editor may warn the author(s) and request the rewriting and/or appropriate citation of the submission. If the plagiarism rate is more than 20%, the study may be rejected or the institution to which the author(s) are affiliated may be notified of the plagiarism rate. If plagiarism is detected after publication, this situation is disclosed to the readership in the journal as an editor's note and the author(s') institutions are notified of this violation rate.

If the Editorial Board detects copyright infringement and plagiarism in the works during the evaluation process, it has the authority to withdraw the work within 15 days. The withdrawn article is announced in the journal and information about the withdrawn article is included in the first issue published after the retraction. In addition, the reason for the retraction is communicated to the institutions and organizations in which the journal is indexed.

Scientific Publication Ethics

Journal of Academic Opinion (JAO) has adopted various policies based on the guidelines and principles published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as its publication ethics and open access policy in order to carry out all stages of the publication process in accordance with ethical principles. These policies cover the author(s), editors, referees and all related processes. When situations are encountered that are not clearly stated within the framework of scientific publication ethics determined by JAO, the mentioned guidelines and principles will be applied. All actors must comply with ethical principles during the broadcasting process.

JAO's publication process is based on the principle of impartial production, development and sharing of information using scientific methods. The publication ethics and open access policy, prepared by TR Dizin to create ethical assurance in scientific periodical publishing and adopted by JAO, requires all stakeholders of the publication process to comply with ethical principles in line with the guidelines and policies. The principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) "Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers" are applied.

Ethics Committee

Within the scope of TR Index 2020 Journal Evaluation Criteria, "Ethics Committee Approval" must be obtained for research conducted in all branches of science, and this approval must be stated and documented in the study. In studies requiring ethics committee permission, the process of which started in 2020 upon this change in Article 8 within the scope of the TR Index Evaluation Criteria, the information regarding the permission in the Ethics Committee Approval (ethics committee name, date and issue number) is included in the method section of the study and also in the first/last year of the study. It is required to be included on the page.

The criteria determined by TR Dizin for the "Ethics Committee Approval" certificate are as follows:

1. Separate ethics committee approval must be obtained for research conducted in all branches of science, including social sciences, and for clinical and experimental studies on humans and animals that require an ethics committee decision, and this approval must be stated and documented in the study.
2. The studies must include a statement that Research and Publication Ethics are complied with.
3. In studies requiring ethics committee permission, information about the permission (committee name, date and issue number) should be included in the method section and also on the first/last page of the study. In case reports, information about the signed informed consent/consent form must be included in the study. In research articles, ETHICS COMMITTEE PERMISSION is not required for studies whose data were collected before 2020.

Accordingly, it will be sent to JAO;

1. In all research conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require collecting data from participants using survey, interview, focus group study, observation, experiment and interview techniques.
2. In retrospective research in accordance with the personal data protection law

information regarding the ethics committee must be included in the method section and research and publication ethics must be adhered to.

Responsibilities of the Editorial Board

• The editorial board evaluates the received studies only in terms of scientific content, without considering the author's ethnic origin, gender, religious beliefs or political choices of the author(s).
• Studies sent to the journal are first checked for plagiarism by the editorial board. The board rejects works with a plagiarism rate above the accepted limit.
• The editorial board implements a fair double-blind peer review process, which is among the journal's publication policies, for the publication of submitted articles. At this stage, it keeps the identity information of the referees confidential and ensures that each study is examined in a timely and objective manner.
• When accepting or rejecting a study for publication, the editorial board has the right to make a final decision, taking into account the importance, originality and clarity of the study, as well as the validity of the study and its suitability for the purpose and scope of the journal.
• The editorial board monitors business processes without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards.
• The editorial board should not allow any conflict of interest or competition between the author(s), editors and reviewers.
• When the editorial board encounters a situation that does not comply with publication ethics or receives an accusation, they are obliged to take necessary action. This obligation also extends to past issues.
• Unpublished methods and information contained in studies submitted to the journal should not be used by anyone in their work without the express written permission of the author.
• The editorial board considers consistent criticisms of the studies published in the journal and gives the author(s) the right to respond to the criticism.

If the Editorial Board determines that the responsibilities listed above are not fulfilled by the editors, the relevant editor's duty will be terminated.

Responsibilities of Referees

• Referees contribute to the editorial process by expressing their opinions to increase the scientific nature of the study and to publish the study. They fulfill their duty as referees with the awareness that they contribute to the development of science.
• When referees think that the content of a submitted study is incompatible with their own scientific field or knowledge, or in cases where a quick evaluation cannot be made, they must withdraw from the evaluation process by informing the editor within 3 days.
• There should be no conflict of interest or competitive conflict between reviewers and researchers, author(s) or sponsors.
• Referees should not use privileged information and/or ideas obtained during the evaluation for their own benefit by keeping them confidential. Additionally, reviewers should not use any part of the data of the study they are reviewing that has not yet been published.
• Referees are obliged to keep all information regarding the submitted work confidential and to inform the editor when they notice copyright infringement or plagiarism by the author.
• Referee criticisms should be made in objective and constructive language. No hostile or insulting criticism should be directed towards the author(s) personally. Reviewers must express their opinions with clear supporting arguments.
• Referees must give detailed reasons for the studies they will reject.

If the Editorial Board determines that the responsibilities listed above are not fulfilled by the referees, the duties of the relevant referees are terminated and the report(s) are canceled.

Author(s) Responsibilities

• Author(s) must collect and interpret research data using honest, impartial and scientific methods. Scientific research should use real and undistorted data.
• The author(s) must declare that the work they submit has not been published before or has not been evaluated for publication anywhere, in any language.
• Author(s) are obliged to declare the supporting institutions, financial resources or conflict of interest, if any, for the work they submit.
• Author(s) must comply with the applicable copyright agreements and laws determined within the journal's scope.
• Author(s) must collect data regarding their work within the framework of ethical principles. The editor and referees may request the raw data that forms the basis of the study from the author(s).
• The author(s) must provide ethics committee approval for research that requires quantitative or qualitative data collection methods such as experiments, surveys, scales, interviews, observations and focus group studies. The document showing the ethics committee decision must be uploaded to the system together with the article application.
• The author(s) should consider the referee's suggestions regarding the study with utmost care and make the requested corrections.
• Author(s) should be able to criticize referee suggestions within the limits of courtesy.
• The works that the author(s) send to the journal must be original. Author(s), contributors or sources must be cited appropriately within the framework of scientific ethical rules and cite relevant sources per the journal's editorial rules.
• If the author(s) detect a significant mistake or flaw in their work published in the journal, they are obliged to report this to the journal editor within 5 days and cooperate with the editor to correct the current mistake or flaw.
• Author(s) who wish to withdraw their work must send a petition signed by each author and stating the withdrawal request to the e-mail address editor@academicopinion.org. The opinion of the editorial board as a result of the review made after the request will be conveyed to the author(s) within 15 days.

If the Editorial Board determines that the responsibilities listed above are not fulfilled by the author(s), it may refrain from publishing the work at any stage. If the situation in question is detected after the study is published, a "Correction Text" will be published in the first issue to be published.