Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

1. Aim and Scope

https://insanvetoplum.org/en/about/aim-scope

2. Editorial Board
https://insanvetoplum.org/en/editorial-board

3. Authors and Authors’ Responsibilities

3.1 Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Concurrently submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a paper that has been previously published. Publication of certain kinds of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the original document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

3.2 Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data connected to a paper for editorial review, and authors should be prepared to provide public access to such data. Furthermore, authors are expected to be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

3.3 Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written a genuinely original work, and if an author uses the work and/or words of others this must be appropriately cited/quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper or copying/paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution) to claiming results from research others have conducted. Plagiarism in all its forms counts as unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. JHS uses iThenticate to check for plagiarism.

3.4 Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of other authors’ works must always be given. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should be cited. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

3.5 Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others are present who have participated in certain substantial aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors have been declared in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper as well as agreed to its submission for publication.

3.6 Authors’ Participation in the Peer Review Process
Submissions are first reviewed by the editorial board. If an article satisfies the necessary conditions of style and content, reviewers will then proceed to evaluate its suitability for publication.
All articles undergo evaluation by two anonymous reviewers. If necessary, the article may be sent to a third reviewer for further assessment. The publication of an article depends upon the approval of these reviewers. Authors must provide the necessary corrections demanded by reviewers.

3.7 Copyediting and Proofreading
JHS publishes articles in Turkish and English. Please write your text in good Turkish or English. Articles in Turkish must have an extended English abstract. Authors who think their Turkish and English needs copyediting may request help from the Journal Secretary. JHS will find somebody for this. The charges for this service belong to the Author(s).

3.8 Charges
The journal does not demand any article submission charges from authors. Authors are responsible only for the copyediting and proofreading charges.

3.9 Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When authors realize that their articles have a significant error or inaccuracy, it is their duty to notify the journal’s secretary and cooperate with the editors to reorganize the paper as soon as possible. If the editors learn from a third party that an article has a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ duty to correct paper or provide evidence to the journal editors about the correctness of the paper as soon as possible.

3.10 Acceptance Letter
If the author needs and demands an acceptance letter showing the status of the article, it may be supplied by editorial board. This letter will include a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number which the author may need for any future required official processes. The Digital Object Identifier (DOI) may be used to cite and link to electronic documents. The DOI consists of a unique alpha-numeric character string which is assigned to a document by the publisher upon the initial electronic publication. The assigned DOI never changes. Therefore, it is an ideal medium for citing a document, particularly for 'articles in press' because they have not yet received their full bibliographic information. When you use a DOI to create links to documents on the web, the DOIs are guaranteed never to change.

3.11 Financial Support
Authors should indicate clearly if they have received any financial support from any institution or person.

--> For more information, please check the link:
https://insanvetoplum.org/en/nc/ga

4. Peer-review process

4.1 Review Process and Policy
The peer-review process is an essential component of the scientific process. Reviews by independent scholars provide advice to the editorial board of JHS for choosing the best articles to publish. JHS conducts a double-blind review process.
JHS is an international journal both in authorship and readership. For this reason referees are carefully selected from the worldwide academic community. Referees’ names are kept confidential and may only be disclosed to the editors, who are also instructed to maintain confidentiality. Unbiased consideration is given to all manuscripts offered for publication regardless of the race, gender, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship, political philosophy, age, or reputation of the author(s).

4.2 Choosing Peer Reviewers and Their Duties
Peer reviewers for JHS are chosen among experts in the scientific topic addressed in the articles. They are selected for their objectivity and scientific knowledge. All reviewers are informed of what JHS expects. They are expected to fill the evaluation form and prepare a separate report if necessary.
Anyone with a conflict of interest regarding the article’s subject is not eligible to be a reviewer for that article. Reviewers should contact the editorial office to declare any potential conflicts of interest in advance of refereeing an article (e.g., being a co-worker or collaborator with one of the authors, being in a position which precludes giving an objective opinion of the work, those working for a company whose product has been tested or who is a competitor, or those with special political or ideological agendas).
Reviews are expected to be professional, honest, courteous, prompt, and constructive. The desired major elements of a high-quality review are as follows:
• The reviewer should have identified and commented on the major strengths and weaknesses of the study design and methodology.
• The reviewer should comment accurately and constructively about the quality of the author's interpretation of the data, including acknowledgment of its limitations.
• The reviewer should comment on the major strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript as a written communication, independent of the design, methodology, results, and interpretation of the study.
• The reviewer should comment on any ethical concerns raised by the study, or any possible evidence of low standards of scientific conduct.
• The reviewer should provide the author with useful suggestions for improving the manuscript.
• The reviewer's comments to the author should be constructive and professional.
• The review should provide the editor with the proper context and perspective to make a decision on acceptance (and/or revision) of the manuscript.
• Reviewers are expected to point out relevant work that has not been cited and to use citations to explain where elements of the work have been previously reported. They should also note any substantial similarity between the manuscript and any other paper published in or submitted to another journal.
• We request that reviewers do not contact authors directly. In most cases two reviewers will be consulted, but the opinion of these reviewers may not reflect the Co-Editor’s final decision on an article. Receiving partial advice from one referee can give authors a misleading impression of the peer-review process.

4.3 Review Process
The editors of JHS routinely assess all reviews for quality. Ratings for review quality and other performance characteristics of the reviewers are periodically assessed to ensure optimal journal performance. Performance measures such as review completion times should be used to assess changes in processing that might improve journal performance. Individual performance is kept confidential. Editors who do not contribute to the journal’s quality may be removed from the list. The review process in JHS is as follows:

We assign two referees for each article.

*If the two referees accept an article as publishable, the article is published.

*If one of the referees accepts it and the other rejects it, the article is transferred to a third referee. If the third referee accepts it, the article is published. If he/she rejects it, the article is rejected.

*If two of the referees reject an article, it is directly rejected and not published.

You can find the referee form here:
https://insanvetoplum.org/content/4-kvn/2-ybk/referee-form.pdf

4.4 Confidentiality
During the review process, the information and ideas a referee obtains are kept confidential and not used for competitive advantage. The submitted manuscript is privileged communication and must be kept confidential.
• The submitted manuscript should not be retained or copied by the reviewers. Also, reviewers must not share the manuscript with any colleagues without the explicit permission of the editor.
• Reviewers and editors must not make any personal or professional use of the data, arguments, or interpretations (other than those directly involved in its peer review) prior to publication unless they have the authors’ specific permission or are writing an editorial or commentary to accompany the article.
• Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest and inform the editorial board.
• Reviewers must inform the journal if they are unable to review a paper or can do so only with some delay.
• Reviewers must objectively judge the quality of the research reported; give fair, frank, and constructive criticism; and refrain from personally criticizing the authors. Comments made by referees may be seen by the authors. Therefore referees’ judgments should be explained and supported so that authors can understand the basis of the comments and judgments.
• If reviewers suspect misconduct, they should notify the editor in confidence and not share their concerns with other parties unless officially notified by the journal that they may do so.
If you have any ethical concerns about a paper, whether published or in review, please contact the editor immediately. Please feel free to contact us for any further information via e-mail to editor@insanvetoplum.org

5. Publication Ethics

5.1 Ethical Policy
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the authors’ quality of work and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important for all parties involved in the act of publishing – the author, the editors, the peer reviewers, and the society owning the journals – to agree upon the standards of expected ethical behavior. The approval of an article sent to The Journal of Humanity & Society (JHS) for publication depends on the following ethical and legal conditions:

• Every author must agree on the article’s content and the submission of this content to the journal.
• If the editors identify research misconduct, this situation is considered unethical; in this case, JHS reserves the right to prevent the publication of the paper.
• No kind of misconduct is approvable or acceptable. In no case may editors allow such a situation to take place.
• The article’s content is to be approved through reviews by authoritative and responsible referees.
• The article, partially or completely, must never have been previously published in any language.
• An article submitted to JHS for publication my not be submitted to another journal during the review process.
• If a draft submitted to JHS includes figures, tables, or long blocks of text that have been previously published, the author is responsible for obtaining copyright permission from the original owners. All copyrighted elements should be specified appropriately in the draft submitted to JHS.
• JHS provides guidelines for retracting or correcting articles when needed, and authors should feel free to ask any questions related to these corrections.

5.1.1 Reporting Standards
The authors should provide articles of original research and present an accurate account of the work they have performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient details and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements reflect unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Articles that perform reviews or professional publications must also be accurate and objective. Any works with editorial ‘opinions’ should be identified as such.

5.2 Submission Checklist
The following list will be useful during an article’s final check prior to submission. Please consult this Guide for Authors for further details on any item and to ensure that the following items are present:
• The first page must contain the full name(s) and affiliation(s) of all author(s).
• If article is written by two or more authors, one author must be defined as the corresponding author. The corresponding author’s name, mailing address, work/mobile phone number(s), and e-mail address must be included on the first page.
• For articles in Turkish:

  • The Turkish abstract must have a title, be 150-200 words long, and have 5-8 keywords.
  • The article must also provide an English abstract that is 150-200 words long and have 5-8 keywords in English.
  • An extended abstract between 1500 and 2000 words in length must be provided in English. This extended abstract should include the title in English, the article’s sub-topics, and all references. (This extended abstract may be submitted after acceptance).
    • For articles in English:
  • The English abstract must have a title, be 150-200 words long, and have 5-8 keywords.
  • The article must also provide a Turkish abstract that is 150-200 words long and have 5-8 keywords in Turkish. If the author does not know Turkish, this part will be translated by JHS for a fee.
    • All figure’s must have captions and be supplied as a separate file in a suitable format (e.g., .jpg, .pdf, or .png), at a proper resolution and size for printing.
    • All tables must include a title, description, and any necessary footnotes.
    • Manuscripts should be checked for spelling and grammar.
    • All references should be in the correct format (APA 6th edition)
    • All references mentioned in the text must be in the reference list and vice versa.
    • Permission must be obtained for the use of copyrighted material from other sources (including the Web).

5.3 Order of Publication
After all the review and copyediting processes have been completed, the Editorial Board will decide in which issue the article will take place. Normally, articles are published according to their submission date, but exceptions may occur in some cases related to special issues or the focus of the article. The author(s) will be informed about this decision.

5.4 Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it becomes the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and to cooperate with the editor to retract/correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract/correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

6. Copyright and Access

6.1 Copyright
Authors should add confirmation of copyright of the article when submitted their paper to JHS. A sample is shown below:
“The attached article(s), whose writer(s) and title(s) are clearly indicated below, has/have been sent for your consideration to be published in JHS. The article(s) has/have not yet been published anywhere else, nor has/have the article(s) been sent to another journal for consideration. In the case that any portion or the entirety of the article be accepted for publication, we affirm that all publishing rights shall belong permanently to JHS for each accepted article.
As the writer(s) whose signature(s) appear below, I/we accept all the conditions found in the Author Guidelines section and affirm that the below article(s) has/have been written in accordance with the ethical rules stated therein. I/we furthermore affirm that all accompanying articles are original works, that all articles are accompanied by their original copyright forms, that the writer/writers transfers/transfer all editing rights to the JHS Publications Board, and that all copyrights, including registered copyrights, shall be transferred to JHS upon acceptance.”

6.2 Open Access System
JHS has an open access policy. All published articles and reviews can be accessed at https://www.insanvetoplum.org/en. A hardcopy of the Journal will also be sent to all author(s). In addition, the corresponding author will be provided with an electronic copy of the article at no cost via e-mail.

7. Archiving
All JHS issues are preserved on the JHS website; all articles are also published as hard copies.

8. Ownership
When writers send their articles for consideration to be published in JHS, the articles must not yet have been published elsewhere or been sent to another journal for consideration. In the case that any or all of an article be accepted for publication, we affirm that all publishing rights for each accepted article shall belong to JHS for ten years.

9. Web site
JHS’s web site, https://www.insanvetoplum.org, includes all information regarding editors and authors as well as all articles, article reviews, and book reviews. One can find all documents on the website and access them without any difficulty

10. Publishing Schedule
Accepted articles are first published immediately as an online publication and then are published in the hard-copy issue.
JHS first published in 2011 with two issues per year, and this biannual publishing schedule continued until 2018. However, JHS began publishing quarterly in 2018, and this publishing schedule has since remained in effect.
After all review and copyediting processes have been completed, the Editorial Board decides in which issue the article will take place. Normally, the articles are published according to submission date, but in some cases exceptions are made related to special issues or the focus of the article. The author(s) will be informed about such decisions.