The ethical principles and publication policy to be followed in the International Innovative Education Researcher (IEdRes) journal are based on the directive prepared by COPE (2011) (Committee on Publication Ethics). This directive, which was prepared by COPE, was accessed from DERGİPARK, which is a platform, under the umbrella of TUBITAK ULAKBIM, to offer electronic services for academic peer-reviewed journals in Turkey (https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/file/6).
Editors must;
1.1. be responsible for the process of publication in the journal. The author/s are responsible for the content of the articles.
1.2. try to meet the needs of readers and authors.
1.3. try to constantly improve the journal.
1.4. use appropriate processes to ensure the quality of the articles to be published.
1.5. defend freedom of expression.
1.6. preserve the integrity of academic background.
1.7. not allow business needs to compromise intellectual and ethical standards.
1.8. not hesitate to issue correction, clarification, withdrawal and apology when necessary.
1.9. seek the opinions of the authors, readers, referees and editorial board members on the improvement of the journal's processes,
1.10. follow up and encourage research on refereeing and publishing, and review the journal's processes in the light of new information,
1.11. try to persuade publishers to provide necessary resources and expert consultancy (e.g. designer, lawyer, etc.),
1.12. support initiatives considered to reduce inappropriate behavior and abuse in the field of research and publishing,
1.13. support initiatives to educate researchers on publication ethics,
1.14. evaluate the effects of journal policies on authors and referees and to review these policies, if necessary, to encourage responsible behavior and to deter misconduct,
1.15. make sure that the press releases published by the journal accurately reflect the message of the relevant article and place it in context.
2.1. Readers should be made aware of who finances the research and whether fund holders have a role in the research and publication process.
Application recommendations for editors:
To ensure that all published research reports and reviews are reviewed by appropriately qualified referees (including statistical review when necessary)
To make the sections of the journal that are not reviewed by the referee be clearly stated,
To adopt processes that will encourage the preparation of research reports accurately, completely and clearly,
To use appropriate guidelines and checklists (eg. MIAME, 1 CONSORT2)
To develop transparency policies to encourage disclosure of the source of non-research articles,
To adopt authorship and contribution systems that will ensure that the people named are actually the people who do the work, in order to prevent unwanted practices (such as ghost and guest writers) and to encourage appropriate practices,
To inform readers about the measures taken to ensure that articles from the editorial board and other staff of the journal are also evaluated objectively and without prejudice.
3.1. The editor's decision to accept or decline a manuscript that has been submitted for publication should be based on the importance, originality and clarity of the manuscript, the validity of the study, and its relevance to the journal's subject area.
3.2. Editors should not change the acceptance decision regarding the submitted articles unless there is a serious problem with the article.
3.3. New editors should not change the publication decision made in the previous editorial period regarding the submitted articles, unless there is a serious problem.
3.4. A description of the refereeing process should be published and editors should be able to explain the reason for any deviation from this process if it does occur.
3.5. Journals should have an explained mechanism to enable authors to raise an objection to the editor when necessary.
3.6. Editors should prepare a guideline to direct the authors on any subject that may be required, this guide should be updated periodically and should give a link to this directive.
3.7. Editors should provide guidance on the list of contributors in accordance with the authorship guidelines and the standards of the relevant field.
Application recommendations for editors:
To regularly review the guidelines prepared for authors and link to relevant guides (eg ICMJE5, Responsible research publishing: international standards for authors)
To publish relevant conflicts of interest for all contributors and to publish corrections if this information is revealed after publication,
To ensure that appropriate referees (i.e. people who can evaluate the article without suspicion of conflict of interest) are selected for the submitted articles.
To respect the request from the author that his/her article should not be submitted to a particular person for review, if it has a reasonable explanation and is applicable,
To refer to COPE workflow charts as a guide in cases of suspected fraud and controversial authorship (http://publicationethics.org/flowcharts)
To specify in detail how to apply in cases of suspected fraud (eg by linking to COPE workflow charts),
To publish the application and acceptance dates of the articles.
4.1. Editors should prepare a guideline for referees on what is expected of them, including reviewing the submitted manuscript with confidentiality. This guide should be updated regularly and provide a link to this directive.
4.2. Editors should ask reviewers to explain whether there are any potential conflicts of interest before they agree to review an article.
4.3. Editors should have a system in which the identities of referees are protected unless they use an open peer review process by notifying authors and referees.
Application recommendations for editors:
To encourage referees to comment on ethical issues and potential research and publication abuse that may arise for the article they have reviewed (e.g., unethical design of research, patient consent or lack of sufficient detail regarding the protection of subjects, improper data use and presentation),
To encourage referees to comment on the originality of the article they have reviewed and to be alert to unnecessary publication or plagiarism,
To provide the referees with the tools they may need to review relevant publications (eg links to the bibliographic list and bibliographic search facility),
To convey the referee comments to the author as they are, unless they contain insulting or offensive statements,
To properly state the referees' contribution to the journal,
To encourage academic institutions to accept refereeing activity as part of academic progress,
To manage the referees' work and do what is necessary to ensure their high performance,
To prepare a database with the names of the appropriate referees and update this database according to the referee's performance,
To stop receiving opinions from referees who are constantly preparing late, impolite, low-quality reports
To ensure that the referee database represents the academic community related to the subject of the journal and to add new referees as needed,
To use a wide range of sources such as author recommendations, bibliographic databases, not just personal relationships to identify possible new referees,
To make use of COPE workflow charts when suspected of referee misconduct.
5.1. Editors provide new board members with guidelines on everything expected of them and inform former members of new developments and policies.
Application recommendations for editors:
To identify qualified editorial board members for unbiased peer review, who will contribute to the good management and development of the journal, and to determine appropriate policies for evaluating articles from editorial board members.
To regularly review the design of editorial board
To clearly direct the editorial board members about the jobs and tasks expected of them. These tasks are:
◦ acting as the journal’s ambassadors
◦ supporting and promoting the journal
◦ trying to find the best authors and articles (eg by reviewing meeting abstracts) and encouraging them to submit articles actively
◦ examining the articles submitted to the journal
◦ accepting commissions to write editorial papers, reviews and comments on articles in their field of expertise
◦ attending and contributing to editorial board meetings
To consult the editorial board members on a regular basis, for example once a year, to get their opinion on the management of the journal, to report changes in journal policies and to plan for the future.