Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

Socrates Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Studies (SJISS) has established its ethical duties and responsibilities in accordance with the guidelines and policies published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), recognizing the importance of open access and ethical integrity.

In line with the ethical principles of science, all parties involved in the publication process—including authors, researchers, publishers, reviewers, editors, and section editors—are expected to adhere strictly to these ethical rules. SJISS requires all stakeholders to maintain the following ethical responsibilities throughout all stages of the publication process.

Ethical Guidelines for Authors

  • All manuscripts submitted to SJISS are assumed to be original and prepared by the author(s). Submitting a manuscript that has been previously published elsewhere is not allowed. Likewise, authors may not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. After submission to SJISS, changes in author responsibilities (such as adding/removing authors or changing author order) are not permitted. If authors utilize work from other researchers (language, ideas, graphics, images, etc.), proper citation in accordance with the journal’s rules is mandatory. All listed authors are responsible for this requirement. Listing individuals as authors who did not contribute or omitting those who did contribute is unethical. Potential conflicts of interest must also be disclosed.

  • Authors must base their findings on solid scientific evidence when preparing their manuscripts. Manipulating data, fabricating data without source, or selectively altering or deleting data are considered ethical violations and damage the author’s academic credibility. Authors must also avoid defamatory remarks and maintain a scientific and respectful tone throughout the study.

  • Individuals who did not intellectually contribute to the study should not be listed as authors. In case of an adverse situation, the editorial board may request raw data from the author(s). In such cases, the relevant documents must be submitted to the editorial and advisory boards. If the study involves human participants, informed consent must be obtained, and the necessary permissions for data collection, analysis, and research must be documented. Authors may consult with the editor to make changes in their work at the early view stage if any issues arise.

Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

  • SJISS uses a double-blind peer-review system. The review process is confidential, and this information must not be shared with third parties. Authors and reviewers remain anonymous and do not communicate directly. All communication is conducted through the journal’s system via the editorial team.

  • Each manuscript is assigned to two reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within 30 days, act objectively, and base their assessments on scientific merit. If the reviewers reach opposing conclusions, a third reviewer is assigned.

  • If a reviewer detects any ethical misconduct or conflict of interest, they must inform the editor. Reviewers must use appropriate and professional language, avoiding insulting, slanderous, or accusatory comments.

Ethical Guidelines for Editors and Section Editors

  • Editors must maintain confidentiality of the peer-review process, not disclose information to third parties, protect the intellectual property rights of published articles, and treat all submissions impartially. If there is an allegation of plagiarism or duplicate submission/publication, the editor is responsible for investigating the matter and taking necessary action, including the rejection of the manuscript if proven.

  • If any of the journal's editors wish to publish in the journal, their editorial privileges are temporarily suspended until the publication process is complete. The process follows the same ethical principles and is subject to the double-blind review system.

Publication Policy

  • All publication procedures are carried out through the journal’s official website: https://newerajournal.com/

  • A double-blind peer-review system is applied. To ensure impartiality, information such as author names, institutional affiliations, etc., is removed from the manuscripts before they are sent to reviewers.

  • Manuscripts are first checked for compliance with the journal’s submission guidelines. If compliant, they are reviewed by the editor, then forwarded to section editors and assigned to two experts in the relevant field.

  • If both reviewers provide positive reports or request revisions, the authors are contacted via the section editors. Authors are required to submit the revised manuscript within 15 days, incorporating all requested changes.

  • If both reviewers recommend rejection, the manuscript is declined, and the decision is communicated to the author along with the reports. If one reviewer recommends acceptance and the other rejection, a third reviewer is assigned. The final decision is based on the third review.

  • Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within 30 days. A reminder is sent if the deadline passes, followed by an additional 10-day extension. If there is still no response, a new reviewer is assigned.

  • Once accepted, the authors must upload the final version within 15 days, including full author information (name, institution, email, ORCID). The manuscript is then reviewed by language editors, formatted, and assigned to an issue.

Information on Studies Requiring Ethical Committee Approval

Studies requiring ethical committee approval include:

  • All qualitative or quantitative research involving data collection from participants through surveys, interviews, focus groups, observations, experiments, or other interaction techniques;

  • Use of humans or animals (including materials or data) for scientific or experimental purposes;

  • Clinical research conducted on humans;

  • Research conducted on animals;

  • Retrospective studies subject to data protection laws.

For studies requiring ethical approval, authors must provide a report containing the name of the ethics committee and, if applicable, the reference number. If the study is exempt from ethical approval, a valid explanation must be submitted to the journal’s editorial office.