Ethical Principles

Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

1. Research and Publication Ethics

The publication processes applied in Nesir: Journal of Literary Studies are based on the impartial and reputable development and dissemination of knowledge. These processes directly reflect the quality of the work produced by authors and the institutions supporting them. Peer-reviewed studies serve to consolidate and promote the scientific method. Therefore, it is essential that all stakeholders in the process (authors, readers, researchers, publishers, reviewers, and editors) adhere to ethical principles.

Our journal follows the international publishing ethics principles set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The ethical duties and responsibilities outlined below have been prepared in accordance with the COPE Guidelines (See: COPE Guidelines in Turkish).

2. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

• Submitted manuscripts must be original, research-based, and aligned with the specified academic fields.
• Manuscripts must not violate scientific publication ethics, including but not limited to plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, salami slicing, unjust authorship, and failure to disclose supporting institutions.
• A manuscript must not be simultaneously submitted to another journal and must not have been previously published elsewhere.
• Listing individuals who have not made academic contributions as authors or determining the order of authors based on title, age, or gender instead of scientific contribution violates research ethics.
• Authors must provide the raw data of their study if requested by the editor.
• By submitting a manuscript to Nesir: Journal of Literary Studies, authors are deemed to have read and accepted the journal’s publication and writing guidelines.
• All cited sources must be accurately and completely referenced, and the bibliography must be properly formatted.
• If an author detects an error in their manuscript during evaluation, early view, or online publication, they must inform the editor and collaborate in making corrections or requesting retraction.
• Authors must comply with the Higher Education Council’s Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive.

3. Conflict of Interest Policy

A conflict of interest occurs when authors, reviewers, or editors have financial, academic, or personal relationships that could influence their impartial decision-making process regarding a submitted manuscript.

• Authors must explicitly declare any potential conflicts of interest in their manuscripts.
• Reviewers who identify a conflict of interest must notify the editors and decline to review the manuscript.
• Editors must ensure an impartial review process by identifying conflicts of interest among reviewers or authors and making appropriate adjustments.
• Funding sources must be clearly disclosed by authors at the beginning of the study.
• The journal enforces a double-blind peer review system to prevent conflicts of interest.

4. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Reviewers must evaluate the scientific content and academic quality of manuscripts.
• Once the review process is completed, no information about the manuscript should be shared with third parties.
• Review reports must be objective, constructive, and measured. Disrespectful, offensive, or accusatory language must not be used.
• Negative evaluations must be supported with concrete reasons and evidence.
• Reviewers must complete their evaluations within the allotted time. If unable to do so, they should inform the editors in a reasonable period.

5. Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

• Editors must ensure that the peer review process is conducted fairly and impartially.
• Manuscripts must undergo a plagiarism check, and necessary actions must be taken to prevent academic misconduct.
• Editors must prioritize academic integrity and objectivity when accepting manuscripts for publication.

6. Retraction Policy

A manuscript may be retracted under the following circumstances:

• Plagiarism or serious academic misconduct is detected.
• Data fabrication or manipulation is identified.
• Duplicate publication or salami slicing is confirmed.
• The author(s) request a retraction, and it is deemed appropriate by the editors.

Retraction Process:

1. The Editorial Board initiates an ethics review process to verify the issue.
2. If the violation is confirmed, the manuscript is marked as “retracted”, and a retraction notice explaining the reasons is published.
3. Retracted articles remain in the journal archive, but they are labeled with a “Retraction” notice to indicate ethical concerns.

       7. Correction and Publication Update Policy

• Minor errors (e.g., grammatical or typographical mistakes) can be corrected by the authors or editors.
• If significant scientific errors are detected, a correction notice must be published, and readers must be informed.
• The publisher and editors have the authority to request corrections or retract a manuscript if a major issue is identified.

Violations of Scientific Research and Publication Ethics According to Article 4 of the Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive

(1) Actions that violate scientific research and publication ethics are as follows:

a) Plagiarism: Presenting others’ original ideas, methods, data, or works as one’s own without proper citation, either partially or completely, in violation of scientific principles.

b) Fabrication: Using nonexistent or falsified data in scientific research.

c) Falsification: Distorting research records or obtained data, presenting unused devices or materials as if they were used, or manipulating research results to fit the interests of supporting individuals or institutions.

ç) Duplicate Publication: Presenting previously published works as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions.

d) Slicing: Unjustifiably dividing the results of a study in a way that disrupts the integrity of the research and publishing them separately in multiple publications to present them as different works in academic appointments and promotions.

e) Unjust Authorship: Including individuals who have not actively contributed as authors, excluding those who have, changing the order of authors without justification, removing names of contributing authors in later editions, or including names of individuals as authors based on influence rather than contribution.

(2) Other types of ethical violations include:

a) Failing to acknowledge individuals, institutions, or organizations that provided support for research in resulting publications.

b) Using unpublished or unapproved theses or studies as sources without permission from the original author.

c) Failing to adhere to ethical principles in research involving human or animal subjects, or disregarding patient rights in publications.

ç) Violating legal provisions regarding biomedical research and other clinical studies involving human subjects.

d) Sharing information from a work under review with third parties without the explicit permission of the author before its publication.

e) Misusing resources, facilities, or equipment allocated for scientific research for purposes unrelated to the research.

f) Making baseless, unjustified, and deliberate accusations of ethical violations.

g) Publishing data obtained from surveys and attitude research conducted within a scientific study without obtaining explicit consent from participants or, in the case of institutional research, without securing permission from the relevant institution.

h) Causing harm to animal health or ecological balance in research and experiments.

ı) Failing to obtain written permission from the relevant authorities before beginning research or experiments that require prior approval.

i) Conducting research or experiments that violate regulations or international agreements to which Türkiye is a party.

j) Failing to inform and warn relevant parties about potential harmful applications related to a scientific study.

k) Using data and information obtained from other individuals and institutions beyond the permitted scope or in a manner inconsistent with the agreed terms, failing to maintain confidentiality, or neglecting to ensure data protection.

l) Making false or misleading statements regarding scientific research and publications in academic appointments and promotions.

Situations That Cannot Be Considered as Violations of Scientific Research and Publication Ethics

Article 5 (1) The use of anonymous information, fundamental knowledge in scientific fields, mathematical theorems, and proofs—provided that another person’s original style and expression are not directly copied—cannot be considered an ethical violation in academic studies.