Ethical Principles and Publication Policy
The publication process in the ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences was created to develop and present information objectively. For this reason, the processes applied to reflect the quality of the authors and the quality of the institutional work that supports the authors. The articles reviewed embody and encourage the scientific method. In this respect, it is important that all stakeholders of the process (authors, readers and researchers, publishers, referees and editors) comply with the standards regarding ethical principles. The Journal expects all stakeholders to bear the ethical responsibilities described below within the scope of publication ethics. The ethical duties and responsibilities adopted by The Journal have been prepared by taking into account the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and policies.
Actions Contrary To Scientific Research And Publication Ethics
Presenting others’ ideas, methods, data, practices, writing, forms or studies partly or wholly without referencing to the owners according to scientific rules,
Producing data that is not based on research, editing or changing the presented or published study by basing it on fictitious data, reporting or publishing these, claiming research has been done while actually it has not,
Falsifying the obtained data and the research records, showing the methods, devices and materials that were not used in the study as if they had been used, not taking the data that is not suitable to the research hypothesis into consideration, changing the data and/or results to make them be appropriate to the related theory and presuppositions, falsifying or manipulating the research results in accordance with the advantages of the people and the institutions that support the researcher,
To present more than one work containing the same results of a research separately in evaluations for associate professorship exams and academic promotions,
Dissecting the results of a study in a way that would destroy the integrity of the study and inappropriately, publishing them separately without referencing each study, thus increasing the number of publications to present them in associate professorship exam evaluations and academic promotions,
Including those who don’t have an active contribution among authors, not including those who have an active contribution among authors, changing the ranking of authors without a reason and inappropriately, excluding the names of those with active contribution from the study during publication or in next publications, making one’s name included – by exerting influence – in authors despite having no active contribution,
-Other Types of Violation of Ethics
In the publications of supported researches, not clearly stating the support people, institutions or organizations and their contributions to the research, not complying with the ethical rules in research on humans and animals, not respecting the rights of patients in their publications, before publishing the information in a work for which they are assigned to review as a referee. to share, to misuse the resources, places, facilities and devices provided or reserved for scientific research, to accuse completely unfounded, groundless and intentional ethical violations (YÖK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive, Article 8).
-Ethical rules must be complied with in the studies conducted on humans and animals.
-It should be stated that the copyright regulations are complied with for the intellectual and artistic works used.
-Necessary permissions must be obtained to use others' scale, questionnaires, photographs, etc. and stated.
-In the case of studies, an "informed consent form" should be obtained and stated.
-If the research has been conducted in the fields listed below, it is mandatory to upload an “Ethics Committee Approval” in the annex of the study.
Studies Requiring Ethics Committee Approval
-All kinds of research conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from participants using questionnaires, interviews, focus group work, observation, experimentation,
-Use of humans and animals (including material/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes,
-Clinical studies on humans
-Clinical studies on animals,
-Retrospective studies in accordance with the law on the protection of personal data.
Responsibilities of Writers
All authors cited as research writers must contribute to the research substantially. Other contributors should be listed as co-authors. Contributors to the research should be mentioned as “Declaration of Author Contributions”. The corresponding author should take the consent of other authors before sending the study to the journal. Those who do not have a direct contribution to the research should not be listed as authors.
-Originality and Authenticity
All data in the study must be true and original. The author should present an objective discussion of the importance of his work based on accurate data. Intentionally presenting false information is unacceptable and unethical behavior.
-Multiple, Unnecessary and Simultaneous Publishing
The author should not attempt to publish the same research in more than one journal, or attempt to republish a previously published article, and should comply with scientific research and publication ethics. Such attempts are unacceptable unethical behaviors.
It is mandatory to show / cite all sources used in the study.
-Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
All authors must clearly state any potential financial and interest conflicts that may affect the results of the study. If financial support has been received for the study, its sources should be indicated.
In order to start the evaluation process of the articles sent to the ISPEC journal, a participation fee will be requested as a contribution to the digital printing, typesetting processes, journal staff fee, and the purchase of the DOI number. This fee will be requested regardless of the acceptance/rejection condition of the article.
-Correction of Published Studies
It is the author's responsibility to inform the editor if any significant deficit or mistake is detected in the published work. The author should cooperate with the editorial team of our journal in order to take the necessary actions to correct the situation.
-Withdrawal of the Article
The author can only withdraw the work evaluated in the publishing processes at the pre-check stage. Works cannot be withdrawn at other stages of the publishing process.
-Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should aim to make original research and report. The mentioned literature should be appropriately cited. Uncited mentions from other publications, including the author's own work, are an important moral issue and a crime. If plagiarism is detected in the articles submitted to our journal, they are removed from the publication processes immediately. If it detected after publication, immediate action is going to be taken about the author and the article.
As double-blind refereeing is applied in our journal, author information should not be written in the article file.
Responsibilities of Referees
-Contribution to the Editorial Decision
The referee is obliged to consult the "Referee Evaluation Criteria" in the evaluation process from the moment they are appointed and accepted the task through the system. The referee assists editors with their editorial decisions and assists authors in improving their articles through editorial communication. The referee should point out the completion of other articles, works, references, citations, rules and similar shortcomings related to the article.
-Abiding by the Schedule
Any referee who does not feel qualified to review the article proposal or knows that the article review cannot take place on time should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review, thereby ensuring that the new referee assignment is made.
Articles reviewed should be kept confidential before publication.
Referees acknowledge that the work submitted for their review is the private property of the authors. This also applies to referees who decline their invitation to review.
The names of the referees are not disclosed / published.
Referees should be objective in the decision to publish the text they examine.
Comments on the text should be made impartially and recommendations should be made in a way that the authors can use to improve the text. Personal criticism of the authors is not appropriate.
The referee should identify relevant published work that is not cited by the authors. The referee should also inform the editor of any significant similarities between the article reviewed and any other article (published or unpublished).
-Conflict of Interest
Conflicts of interest should be reported to the editor. There should be no conflict of interest between the referees and the stakeholders of the article under review. In case of any conflict of interest and an appointment outside of the field of expertise, it is recommended to present the situation to the editor and withdraw from the referee process if necessary.
Should the referees notice any ethical violation, plagiarism, etc. they should inform the editor. Referees acknowledge that the work submitted for review is the private property of the authors.
-The Editorial Board have all the responsibility and authority to accept or decline an article.
-The Editorial Board should not be in a conflict of interest about the articles they accepted or declined.
-In the publication process, studies are selected and evaluated according to scientific and academic criteria such as contribution to the field and originality.
-The Editorial Board ensures publication of a correction or withdrawal in case of a mistake or an incompleteness detected in a published article.
-Since double-blind refereeing is adopted in the journal, the names of the referees are kept confidential and not published.
-The refereeing process is at the center of the success of scientific publishing. It is part of our commitment to maintain and improve the referee process.
-The Journal takes the necessary precautions carefully in cases of violation of publishing ethics.
-All kinds of complaints and suggestions regarding the studies published in The Journal, publication processes and editorial team can be sent to the address email@example.com.
-Any feedback from stakeholders is considered an important contribution to R&D studies.
The publication languages of ISPEC Journal are Turkish and English.
-All control and evaluation processes of the texts are reported and archived.
-The texts that are not adjusted according to the Writing Rules are returned to the author without being taken into the evaluation process.
-The Journal publishes texts that was not previously published elsewhere.
-Texts that are in the evaluation process for another journal are returned to the author.
-It can be included in the evaluation process in the ISPEC Journal, considering its interdisciplinary studies in the fields of Agricultural Sciences.
-No more than one (2) study of an author can be published in the same issue regardless of the text type.
-Up to two (3) studies can be published in the same volume, provided that the publication type is different.
-Those who are in the editorial board of the journal can send text to the journal, but they cannot work in the journal at the time the text is evaluated.
-The Journal, besides publishing qualified scientific research, has made it a mission to contribute to the author and academic journalism besides publishing qualified scientific research.
-The Publishing Processes carried out by the Editorial team, experts in their fields, have been determined in line with this mission.
-The Journal is an international peer-reviewed journal.
-The Journal is published in print media.
-The Journal is published as one volume and four issues per year in March, June, September and December.
-In the Journal, all policies and processes are decided by the editorial board.
-Special issues can be published with the decision of the editorial board.
-Changes to journal publishing policies and processes are announced on the journal's official website.
-The Journal has an original 6-step Publishing Process. Each stage in the publishing process is carried out according to specific evaluation criteria within the framework of defined job descriptions and workflows.
Articles and translations are subjected to two types of evaluation:
The texts are examined in terms of shape, writing rules and compliance with the APA Citation System. Authors should make the corrections within 11 days.
Texts are examined in terms of plagiarism/similarity rate. The plagiarism/similarity rate determined by the Editorial Board is 15%. Articles exceeding this rate are rejected without being included in the referee process.
It is controlled by the Turkish language editor for Turkish texts and by the English language editor for English texts.
-Revision and Proofreading
In order to ensure the unity in linguistic expression and writing style, necessary corrections are made to the language and style of the text without interfering with the content and within the knowledge of the author. After this stage, no correction is requested from the author, but the text is sent to the author for the final reading.
-Editorial Board Evaluation
Taking the field of the text into account, each article is sent to two editorial board members by the editor. Editorial Board members examine and evaluate the studies according to the Editorial Board Evaluation Criteria within the framework of a double-blind evaluation system and make referee recommendations. The articles reviewed and evaluated by the Editorial Board are subjected to a score ranking, and the first 20 articles are included in the evaluation process.
For the Book and Symposium Reviews, the evaluation is made by the editor of the field assigned by the editor.
The texts are subjected to academic evaluation by the referees determined by the editorial board. In the referee evaluation process, the text is sent to the author for corrections if the referee requests it. The author must fill in the Author Correction Form along with the corrected text.
-If the texts receive positive reports from both referees, they are submitted to the Editorial Board is submitted to its final decision. Texts with a negative report by one referee are returned to the author, even if the other is positive.
-It is important that the authors do not exceed the dates given for corrections in order for the journal publishing process to function properly. The texts of the authors who do not make corrections within the specified dates are removed from the evaluation process.
-In the Journal double-sided blind refereeing system is applied.
-Confidentiality is essential in the referee reports; therefore, referee names are not mentioned in the journal.
-Multiple articles can be sent to a referee.
-The journal is sent to the domestic and foreign libraries determined by the Editorial Board and to international index institutions within one month from the date of publication.
-From the date of its submission to the Journal until the end of the evaluation process and if it is published from the publication date, the translation cannot be published entirely or partially in any form of visual, auditory and printed media without the consent of the Editorial Board of The Journal; it can be quoted by referring to the Journal.
-The plagiarism/similarity rate determined by the Editorial Board is 15%. Articles exceeding this rate are rejected without being included in the referee process.
-During the plagiarism check, the field editor uses Turnitin produced for plagiarism/similarity control and presents the results to the editor in a report.
-The Journal is an open-access journal; no fee is charged for access.
-The authors are not paid any fees for their published works.
-The editorial board and referees are not paid any fees.
-All financial and legal copyright transactions of the translations are done by the translator.
-No financial support is provided to the translator for copyright and any other charges.
-The author is deemed to have accepted all financial, legal and scientific responsibility since the date the translated text is submitted to The Journal.
We welcome serious objections to reviews by editors and reviewers. An objection message should be sent to the editorial team via e-mail, stating that we did not send your article for our scientific misconceptions. If the objection turns out to be justified, you may be invited to a revised submission version of your article. Thus, the work is sent back to the outer referee. As much detail as possible should be included in the appeal letter. One objection is considered for each article. Therefore, the objection must be clearly stated.
This procedure applies to complaints about content, procedures or policies that are the responsibility of ISPEC Journal of Applied Sciences or our editorial staff. Complaints can provide an opportunity and incentive for improvement, and we aim to respond quickly, courteously and constructively. The complaint must be related to the content, procedures or policies that are the responsibility of ISPEC Journal of Applied Sciences or our editorial staff. Complaints should be emailed directly to the email address and will be treated confidentially. The editor immediately responds to complaints. The editor follows the procedure outlined in the COPE flowchart regarding complaints. Complaints are reviewed by the relevant member of the editorial team and if they cannot be resolved, the following processes are followed:
- If this initial response is deemed inadequate, the complainant may request that their complaint be forwarded to a more senior member of the journal.
-Complaints can be forwarded to the editor-in-chief if the complainant is not satisfied.
-A full response will be given within two weeks if possible.
COPE publishes a code of practice for editors of scientific journals. This will make it easier to resolve disputes with editors, journals and publishers, but only after the journal's own complaints procedures are exhausted.
Allegations-Suspects of Scientific Misconduct
Scientific misconduct has different definitions. We address these issues on a case-by-case basis, while following the guidance created by major editorial ethics institutions. If the editor suspects an ethical violation or if there is an alleged violation, they are obliged to take action. This task covers both published and unpublished articles. The editor should not simply reject articles that raise concerns about potential abuse. Ethically, it is obliged to follow the alleged lawsuits. The editor should follow the COPE flowcharts where appropriate. Editors should first seek a response from anyone suspected of misconduct. If they are not satisfied with the answer, they should ask the relevant employers or institution to investigate. The editor should use all reasonable efforts to ensure that an appropriate investigation into the alleged misconduct is carried out; if this does not happen, the editor should make all reasonable attempts to persist in finding a solution to the problem. This is an arduous but important task. ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences in the History of Medicine adheres to COPE's Ethics Toolkit for a Successful Editorial. ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences editors; will take action to prevent the publication of articles in which plagiarism, citation manipulation, data tampering, data fabrication, and other research misconduct occur. In no case. ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences or its editors will not knowingly allow such abuse to occur. ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences If their editors become aware of any allegations of research misconduct related to an article published in their journal, they will follow COPE's guidelines regarding the allegations. Reviewers should notify the Editor when they suspect research or publication misconduct. The editor is responsible for carrying out the necessary actions by following the COPE recommendations. ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences undertakes to apply it to COPE flowcharts when faced with allegations of abuse in the following or similar subjects.
-What to do when rebroadcast is suspected
-What to do when plagiarism is suspected
-What to do when fabricated data is suspected
-What to do in requests for change of authorship
-What to do when an undisclosed conflict of interest is suspected
-What to do when unfair or gift authorship is suspected
-What to do when an ethical problem is suspected in an article
-Ethical violation suspected e-mail, etc. What to do when notified directly with
-What to do when a suspected ethical violation is announced via social media
Publication of Studies Based on Survey and Interview
ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences adopts the principles of the Editorial Ethics Committee (COPE) "Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers" in order to create ethical assurance in scientific periodicals. In this context, the following points should be followed in the studies submitted to the journal:
1) For research in all branches of science that requires ethics committee approval (ethics committee approval should be obtained, this approval should be stated and documented in the article.
2) In research that requires ethics committee permission, information about the permission (name of the committee, date and number) in the method section, and also on one of the first/last pages of the article; In case reports, information about signing the informed consent/consent form should be included in the article.