Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

The ethical principles and rules given below have been prepared by taking into account the guidelines and policies published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authors, editors and referees are required to carefully examine the following duties and responsibilities for the Inclusive Journal of Educational Research. In addition, the journal's publication policy is also explained by giving information about open access, plagiarism and unethical behavior relating to the Journal of Inclusive Educational Research.

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

• Author (s) must send an original article to the Journal of Inclusive Educational Research.
• It should be stated that the article sent to the journal was not sent to a different journal or published in another journal. The Copyright and Author Agreement of the journal should be signed by all authors and sent to the journal.
• The author (s) must cite correctly and appropriately all references in the article.
• Those who could not contribute to the article should not be added as authors.  Similarly, it should not be recommended to add or remove authors and/or change the author order after the article submission is made.
• Situations and relationships that may represent conflicts of interest should be specified and explained in the articles sent to the journal.
• Raw data regarding the articles that are in the referee evaluation process can be requested. In this case, the author (s) should submit the requested raw data to the editors.
• The author (s) must declare a document showing that they have the right to use the data they use in the article, the necessary permissions for the research/analysis, or the consent of the experimental subjects.
• The author (s) received ethics committee approval for research that requires data collection through quantitative or qualitative methods such as experiments, questionnaires, scales, interviews, observations, and focus group studies that require ethics committee decision; the name of the ethics committee, the date and number of the decision should be indicated on the first-last page of the candidate article and in the method section, and the document showing the ethics committee decision should be uploaded to the system with the submission of the article. In addition, case reports should include information about consent form in the article.
• Author (s) have an obligation to inform the editor and to cooperate with the editor in revision and withdrawal processes in case the author (s) notice a mistake or error in the evaluation process, in the early review stage, or in the published article.

Editors' Ethical Responsibilities

Editors of the Journal of Inclusive Educational Research should have the following ethical duties and responsibilities based on the "COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE):

General Duties and Responsibilities

• Editors, authors, referees and readers should take care to provide feedback and explanation whenever they need information.
• Editors should make an effort to contribute to the development of the journal and to increase its quality.
• Editors should support freedom of thought.
• Editors should follow processes by taking into account intellectual property rights and ethical standards.

Relations with the Reader

• Editors should strive to ensure that the articles published in the journal are compatible with the knowledge and skills of the journal readers.
• Editors should take care that the published articles are sufficiently qualified to contribute scientifically to the reader or researcher.

Relations with Referees

• Editors should appoint a referee (s) in accordance with the knowledge and expertise of the referee (s) in evaluating the articles that apply to the journal for publication.
• Editors must monitor whether there is a conflict of interest between the author and the referee.
• Editors are required to convey to the referees all the necessary information regarding the referee evaluation process and what they are expected to do.
• Editors should carry out the referee evaluation process with double-blind review.
• Editors should make sure that authors do not have access to referee information and that referees cannot access author information.
• Editors should create a database of referees. They should update the database according to the performance and expertise of the referees.
• Editors should identify and prevent unethical or inappropriate peer reviews.
• Editors should encourage referees to scientifically evaluate articles submitted for publication in the journal.

Relations with Authors

• Editors should evaluate the articles submitted to the journal by the author (s) in terms of journal writing rules, importance and genuine value. If the editor decides to reject the manuscript, s/he must clearly and understandably inform the authors of the reason for rejection.
• Editors should provide information in accordance with the double-blind refereeing process whenever the author requests information about the article status.
• Editors should provide notification and feedback to authors in a descriptive and informative manner.
• Editors should constantly update the journal's writing rules and sample template file.

Relations with the Editorial Board

• Editors should ensure that editorial board members evaluate their article work impartially and independently.
• Editors should determine the members of the editorial board by considering their level of contribution to the journal.
• Editors should meet regularly with the editorial board to evaluate the journal's publication policy and development.
• Editors should interact with the editorial board.

Ethical Responsibilities of Referees

• Referees must accept evaluation for articles related to their field of expertise and evaluate them objectively.
• Referees should delete the articles they reviewed after the evaluation process.
• If he/she thinks that he/she faces a conflict of interest during the evaluation process, he/she should refuse to examine the study and inform the editor of the journal.
• Referees should take action on the Referee Evaluation Form while evaluating the articles. They are required to state the decisions regarding whether the article can be published or not and justifications for such decisions on this form.
• Referees should use a polite, respectful and scientific manner in their suggestions after evaluating the article.
• Referees are required to complete the article evaluation within the given time.

Open Access Policy

The Journal of Inclusive Educational Research approves the "Creative Commons Attribution License (Attribution - Non Commercial - No Derivatives 4.0 International CC BY-NC-ND)" license for all published articles. This license permits other authors to use your work in their works for non-commercial purposes, provided that they refer to your work.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Plagiarism and Unethical Behavior

All articles that are in the process of being published in the Journal of Inclusive Educational Research are examined with plagiarism detection software. Generally, it is considered appropriate to publish articles with a similarity rate of 20% or less. However, the similarity rate is low and when the plagiarism reports are examined in detail, if unethical behavior is detected, the article is refused publication.

Listed below are unethical behavior:

• Unfair authorship status: Those who do not contribute intellectually to the study are specified as authors or those who contribute to the study are not specified as authors.
• If the article is produced from the author's master/doctoral thesis or a project, and it is not stated.
• Slicing: that is, publishing more than one article from a single study.
• Conflicts of interest regarding submitted articles are not reported.
• Deciphering the double-blind refereeing process.
• Broadcasting using data that do not actually exist or have been manipulated.
• Not mentioning the name of the person, institution or organization and their contributions in the studies carried out with support.