Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

Journal of Career Review (JCR) is committed to applying publication ethics to the highest standards and abiding by the following principles of publication ethics. These principles are based on the recommendations and guidelines developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Council of Science Editors (CSE), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) and International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) for journal editors.

All stakeholders are expected to bear ethical responsibilities within the scope of publication ethics of the Journal of Career Review (JCR). In this context, JCR Journal undertakes to follow the Code of Conduct and Principles of Transparency and Best Practice prepared by the COPE (Publication Ethics Committee). The monitoring of the Cope Guidelines for Editors is within the scope of the Editors' duty, and the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers must be followed by the journal reviewers.

 

The Journal of Career Review (JCR) publication processes are the basis for the development and distribution of information in an impartial and respectable manner. The processes implemented in this direction are directly reflected in the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support the authors. Peer-reviewed studies are studies that embody and support the scientific method. At this point, it is important that all stakeholders of the process (authors, readers and researchers, publisher, referees and editors) comply with the standards for ethical principles.

 

GENERAL ACTIONS CONTRARY TO SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND PUBLICATION ETHICS

a) plagiarism: showing the original ideas, methods, data or works of others as their own work in part or in whole without attribution in accordance with scientific rules,

b) forgery: using data that does not actually exist or is falsified in Scientific Research,

c) distortion: falsifying research records or data obtained, showing that devices or materials not used in research were used, falsifying or shaping research results in the interests of people and organizations receiving support,

d) re-publication: presenting duplicate publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions,

d) slicing: to present these publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions by dividing the results of a research into pieces in such a way as to disrupt the integrity of the research and in an inappropriate way and publishing them in more than one number,

e) unfair writing: among people without the active contribution of writers to include, or avoid including people with author ranking in a manner unbecoming and unjustified change, the names of those who actively contribute to the next edition of the works out, using its influence to write in the name of the active without the contribution of,

 

Other types of ethical violations include:

a) do not specify the person, institution or organizations that support and their contributions in publications made as a result of research conducted with support,

b) to use dissertations or works that have not yet been submitted or accepted by defense as sources without the permission of the owner,

c) do not follow ethical rules in research on humans and animals, do not respect the rights of patients in their publications,

d) act in violation of the provisions of the relevant legislation in biomedical research and other clinical research related to humans,

d) to share the information contained in a work that it has been commissioned to study with others before publication without the express permission of the owner of the work,

e) use of resources, Places, facilities and devices provided or allocated for Scientific Research,

f) falsely, unwarranted and wilfully alleging ethical violations,

d) publish the data obtained without the explicit consent of the participants in the survey and attitude research conducted as part of a scientific study, or if the research will be conducted in an institution, also without the permission of the institution,

d) damage to animal health and ecological balance in research and experiments,

h) in research and experiments, do not obtain in writing the permissions that must be obtained before starting the work from the authorized units.

(I) conduct research and experiments in violation of the provisions of the legislation or international conventions to which Turkey is a party on relevant research and experiments.

(i) failure to comply with the obligation of researchers and authorities to inform and warn interested persons about possible harmful practices in relation to scientific research,

j) do not use data and information obtained from other persons and institutions in scientific studies to the extent and manner permitted, do not comply with the confidentiality of this information and do not ensure its protection,

k) making false or misleading statements regarding scientific research and publications in academic appointments and upgrades, 

 

In this context, the studies to be evaluated in our journal;

1. Stating that “illuminated consent form”has been obtained in case reports,
2. Obtaining and specifying permission from the owners for the use of scales, surveys, photographs belonging to others,
3. It is necessary to indicate that copyright regulations are complied with for the ideas and works of art used.

 

RESPONSIBILITIES OF STAKEHOLDERS

a) Responsibilities of Editors

The editor and assistant editors of the Journal of Career Review (JCR)  will provide the following ethical duties and responsibilities based on the code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for journal Editors published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and the principles of publication ethics Flowcharts developed by COPE in possible cases of abuse or violation of publication ethics :

* Impartiality and freedom of the publisher: editors evaluate submitted article proposals based on their compliance with the scope of the Journal and the importance and authenticity of their work. Editors do not take into account the race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, nationality or political views of the authors who submitted the article proposal. Other institutions other than the editorial board of the journal may not influence the decision to correct or publish. Editors take care that the published numbers contribute to the reader, researcher, practitioner and scientific field and are of an original nature.

* Independence: the relationship between editors, (editor and Associate Editors) and publisher is based on the principle of editorial independence. According to the written agreement between the editors and the publisher, all decisions of the editors are independent of the publisher and the Journal owner. Editors should reject incomplete and erroneous research that does not comply with journal Policy, publication rules and level without any influence.

* Confidentiality: editors do not share information about a submitted article with anyone other than the responsible author, reviewers and editorial board. It ensures that articles evaluated by at least two referees are evaluated according to the double-sided blind refereeing system and keeps referees confidential.

* Information and differences of opinion: editors and members of the editorial board do not use unpublished information in an article submitted for their own research purposes without the express written permission of the authors. Editors should not have a conflict of interest regarding articles they accept or reject.

* Decision to publish: editors ensure that all articles accepted for publication are subject to peer review by at least two referees who are experts in their field. Editors are responsible for deciding which work to publish from the articles submitted to the Journal, the validity of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the comments of reviewers and such legal requirements. Editors have the responsibility and authority to accept or reject articles. Therefore, he must use his responsibility and authority on the spot and on time.

 

b) Authors' Responsibilities

1. Reporting Standards: Authors of original research should ensure that the work performed and results are presented accurately, followed by an objective discussion of the importance of the work. The article proposal should contain sufficient details and references.

2. Data Access and Retention: Authors are required to retain the raw data of their work. When required, they should submit it for editorial review if requested by the journal.

3. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must submit entirely original works, and if they have used the work or words of others, this must be appropriately cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. For this reason, a similarity rate report is requested from all authors who submit articles to the journal.

4. Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or simultaneous submissions/publications: Authors should not submit a previously published article in another journal for consideration. Submitting an article to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

5. Authorship of the Article: Only people who fulfill the authorship criteria should be listed as the author in the article's content. These authorship criteria are as follows; (i) contributed to the design, implementation, data collection or analysis phases (ii) prepared or made significant intellectual contribution or critically revised the manuscript, or (iii) saw the final version of the manuscript, approved it, and agreed to submit it for publication. The corresponding author must ensure that all authors (according to the definition above) are included in the list of authors and must declare that they have seen the final version of the article and agree to submit it for publication.

6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Authors should disclose conflicts of interest at the earliest possible stage (usually by providing a disclosure form at the time of article submission and by including a statement in the article). All sources of financial support for the study must be declared (including the grant/funding number or other reference number, if applicable).

7. Peer Review: Authors are required to participate in the peer review process and are required to cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors' requests for raw data, disclosures and evidence of ethical approval, and copyright permissions. If a "required revision" decision is made first, authors should review and resubmit their manuscripts by the systematic deadline for reviewers' comments.

8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: When authors find significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they are obliged to immediately notify the journal editors or publishers and to cooperate with the journal editors or publishers to correct a typographical error (erratum) on the article or remove the article from publication. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a material error or inaccuracy, they must take the responsibility of the author to promptly correct or retract the article or provide the journal's editors with evidence of the accuracy of the paper.

 

c) Responsibilities of the Referees

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Assists editors in editorial decisions and assists authors in improving their articles through editorial communication. It should be pointed out that other articles, works, sources, citations, rules and similar deficiencies related to the article should be completed.

2. Speed: Any reviewer who does not feel qualified to review the manuscript proposal or who knows that the review will not occur in a timely manner should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review, thus ensuring that new reviewers are appointed.

3. Confidentiality: All article suggestions submitted for review are confidential and should be treated as such. It should not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor. This also applies to referees who decline an invitation to review.

4. Impartiality Standards: Comments on the article proposal should be made impartially and suggestions should be made in a way that the authors can use to improve the article. Personal criticism of the authors is not appropriate.

5. Acceptance of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published works not cited by the authors. The referee should also notify the editor of any significant similarity of the reviewed article and any other article (published or unpublished).

6. Conflicts of Interest: Conflicts of interest should be reported to the editor. There should be no conflict of interest between the reviewers and the stakeholders of the article that is the subject of evaluation.