Editorial Ethics

The following ethical duties and responsibilities have been prepared by considering the guidelines and policies published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as open access.

Reviewers must respect confidentiality in the article review. The content of the article should not be discussed with other researchers before an article is published. Unpublished materials disclosed in a manuscript under review must not be quoted or referenced by a reviewer without the express written consent of the author, requested through the editor. Information or ideas obtained through article evaluation should be kept confidential and not be used for personal advantage. 
Manuscripts should be reviewed objectively according to the reviewers' expertise in the field. The importance of a manuscript’s contribution to existing research in its field, the quality of articulation of an argument, and the strength of evidence provided are critical factors in reviewing a manuscript’s quality. personal opinions without evidence should not be included in the article review.
If the reviewer realizes that after receiving an article for review, he is involved in the identified research, the referee should report it to the editor and refuse to review it if he knows the researcher participating in the research or for any reason cannot give an objective review of the article. Conflicts of interest may include competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or links with any of the authors, companies, or institutions linked to the article being examined.
The reviewers should indicate the relevant published important works that have not been cited by the authors. the reviewer should inform the editor if there is a significant similarity or overlap between the article in question and other published articles with personal information.

The Editors send all studies submitted for publication to at least two referees who are experts in their scientific fields. The arbitration system of double-blind peer review is applied to be examined by the responsible editor and at least two referees. Editors protect the identity of the author (s) and referees throughout the review process. Editors must not cite or referance unpublished materials in a submitted article without the express written consent of the author.  Information or ideas obtained in peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Decisions regarding the publication are taken objectively by the JAVStudies Board after the review of the submitted article and the peer reviews. The critical factors in the publication decision of the article are the importance of its contribution to the current research in its field, the quality of the discussion and the strength of the evidence provided.
A manuscript rejected by the reviewers is not re-evaluated for publication. Editors must refuse themselves from the review process when they publish a research paper when they have a conflict of interest or personal interests.

JAVStudies expects that studies submitted to be considered for publication are the author(s) own original work, are not currently under review elsewhere, and have not been previously published in any language. Intihal.net software is used to check for plagiarism and/or previous publication, and HBDS rejects articles that have substantial proportions of text that are copied from other sources.
The names of the authors included in the articles should be limited to those who make important contributions to the article. For articles written by academics, authorship credits should provide all three of the conditions specified by the Editorial Ethics Committee (COPE): 1) making substantial contributions to the conception, design, or interpretation of data; 2) drafting or critically revising an article for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the article to be published. 
The authors of original research articles should present a balanced discussion of its importance, as well as the correct evaluation of their work. Basic data should be accurately represented in the article; Adding data or removing outliers is unacceptable. The results should be based on the evidence presented in the article, not on personal opinions.
If major errors / inaccuracies occur after submitting an article, HBDS expects the authors to immediately contact the Editorial Staff so that appropriate corrections can be made on time.
An article is based on previously published works. The author (s) should interpret the ideas or results previously published elsewhere in their own words and list these works in the article by citing them in the references. It is not good to express facts or ideas without showing evidence to support these statements. 
Human Behavior, Development & Society (HBDS) expects that experiments using human subjects have been conducted in compliance with international standards and research protocols, and that they received prior review and approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or ethics committee. Such approval and the approving entity’s name should be specified.


Please click to see the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.