PEGEGOG accepts online submissions through www.pegegog.net. This site will guide authors stepwise through the submission process. All communication during submission process is done via e-mails and web site. We recommend you to check your junk mail during this process in case these e-mails are regarded as spam by your account. Submissions done using other means will not be accepted for publication. To contact us, use [email protected]
Authors should take care to refer to and abide by the author guidelines. Papers that do not address the requirements outlined in the author guidelines will be returned without review.
A Declaration of Conflicting Interests policy refers to a formal policy a journal may have to require a conflict of interest statement or conflict of interest disclosure from a submitting or publishing author. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) states in its Guidelines on Good Publication Practice (2003) that:
“Conflicts of interest arise when authors, reviewers, or editors have interests that are not fully apparent and that may influence their judgments on what is published. They have been described as those which, when revealed later, would make a reasonable reader feel misled or deceived.”
Many scholars, researchers and professionals may have potential conflicts of interest, that could have an effect on – or could be seen to – have an effect on their research. All authors must disclose any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could inappropriately influence (bias) their work. Examples of potential competing interests include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding.
Authors must disclose any interests in the title page file. If there are no interests to declare then please state this: “Declarations of interest: none”. This summary statement will be ultimately published if the article is accepted.
It is important for potential interests to be declared in both places and that the information matches. Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract, a published lecture or academic thesis, that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, including electronically without the written consent of the copyright-holder. To verify originality, your article will be checked by the originality detection service Crossref Similarity Check.
Manuscripts submitted to PEGEGOG must be original and have not been fully or partly published before. All manuscripts go through plagiarism/uniformity control by multiple software programs. It should be noted that uniformity with the author(s) previous work is also considered as plagiarism. Submissions containing plagiarism will be rejected and will not be accepted again.
PEGEGOG adopts open-access policy. PEGEGOG guarantees that it will not ask for any publication fees from any library or reader to access the electronic articles.
All the articles published in PEGEGOG are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License.
Author(s) must accept that the content, the findings, and the conclusions of the submitted manuscripts do not bind the Owner, the Editor, the Assistant Editor, Editorial Board Members, or Scientific Committee Members of PEGEGOG.
Author(s) must declare that manuscripts submitted to PEGEGOG are original and have not been published previously or are under consideration of publication elsewhere.
Author(s) must confirm that Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık Eğitim Danışmanlık Hizmetleri Tic. Ltd. Şti. as the Owner of PEGEGOG retains all the copyrights unconditionally and indefinitely to distribute the articles published by PEGEGOG due course of Intellectual Property Law, Article 22, Act 5846; to share publicly due course of Article 23; and to hold full rights of communication related to the published article anytime, anywhere and via any means due course of Article 25 of Intellectual Property Law.
Since PEGEGOG claims no fees for article review or printing and for access to articles, it has no source of income. Accordingly, the following pecuniary obligations of the manuscripts submitted to PEGEGOG lie with the authors:
The studies in PEGEGOG are published as full texts both in Turkish and English. The journal does not have any translation services for this purpose, but recommends some accredited companies to the author(s).
In accordance with the suggestions made by field editors or reviewers, language editing or editing required by the editorial board of PEGEGOG is done by the aforementioned companies.
All costs incurred in plagiarism detection, layout and galley, references, attribution and attribution check lies with the author(s).
Copyright aims to protect the specific way the article has been written to describe an experiment and the results. Pegem Academy Publishing and Educational Guidance Services Trade Limited Company is committed to its authors to protect and defend their work and their reputation and takes allegations of infringement, plagiarism, ethic disputes and fraud very seriously. Data protection legislation gives you a number of rights to protect you against an organization mishandling your personal information. It is important that you understand your rights and, in this document, we have set out what those rights are and how you can exercise your rights in respect of Pegem Academy Publishing and Educational Guidance Services Trade Limited Company's processing of your personal information.
We collect information about you directly from your input.
We are committed to delivering a relevant and useful experience to you. Depending on how you interact with us and the Service, we use your personal information to:
- Provide, activate and manage your access to and use of the service;
- Process and fulfill a request, order, download, subscription or other transaction;
- Offer you customized content and other personalization to make the Service more efficient for you and more relevant to your interests and geography;
- Notify you about changes, updates and other announcements related to the Service;
- Identify usage trends and develop data analysis, including for the purposes of research, audits, reporting and other business operations, such as to pay royalties and license fees to third-party content providers, determine the effectiveness of our promotional campaigns, evaluate our business performance, or in other ways pursuant to a customer agreement.
- Enhance and improve the Service, such as adding new content and features;
We retain your personal information for as long as necessary to finalize any transaction with you.
We do not share your personal information. We share only your name, ORCID id, e-mail and address in article.
All the articles published in PEGEGOG are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License.
The Service may allow registered users to directly access their account information and make corrections or updates at any time.
Keeping such information up to date is solely the responsibility of the user. Registered users may also close their account directly through the Service or by contacting the administrator.
You have the right under European and certain other privacy and data protection laws, as may be applicable, to request free of charge:
- Access to and correction and deletion of your personal information;
- Restriction of our processing of your personal information, or to object to our processing; and/or
- Portability of your personal information.
If you wish to exercise any of these rights, please contact us through [email protected] We will respond to your request consistent with applicable laws. To protect your privacy and security, we may require you to verify your identity.
We take precautions to safeguard your personal information against loss, theft and misuse and unauthorized access, disclosure, alteration and destruction through the use of appropriate technical and organizational measures.
We retain your personal information for as long as necessary to provide the Service and fulfill the transactions you have requested, or for other essential purposes such as complying with our legal obligations, maintaining business and financial records, resolving disputes, maintaining security, detecting and preventing fraud and abuse, and enforcing our agreements.
When we collect from you any personal information within the scope of European data protection laws, we do so:
- Where necessary to provide the service, fulfill a transaction or otherwise perform a contract with you or at your request prior to entering into a contract;
- Where necessary for our compliance with applicable law or other legal obligation;
- Where necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest;
- Where applicable, with your consent; and/or
- As necessary to operate our business, protect the security of our systems, customers and users, detect or prevent fraud, or fulfill our other legitimate interests as described in the sections above, except where our interests are overridden by your privacy rights.
Where we rely on your consent to process personal information, you have the right to withdraw your consent at any time, and where we rely on legitimate interests, you may have the right to object to our processing.
Last update: April 01, 2020
PEGEGOG values holistic and exhaustive publishing for researchers and libraries and acknowledges that this can be realized by publishing reliable and original research articles. In the case that a study or article will be withdrawn, the author(s) and the editorial board will share some responsibilities as required by the publishing policies of PEGEGOG. These responsibilities are listed below:
If the author(s) finds a mistake in their study which is unpublished or in early release or review process, they are obliged to cooperate with the editor of the journal during the withdrawal process.
The author(s) who wants to withdraw their study which is in review process is obliged to send a mail about withdrawal. The editorial board will return to the author(s) within a week, evaluating the request for withdrawal.
The studies the copyright of which is transferred to PEGEGOG during the submission process cannot be submitted to other journals for review unless they are approved for withdrawal.
The editorial board of PEGEGOG holds the responsibility of starting an investigation about a study if a suspicion arises that the study includes plagiarism and/or it has copyright issues.
If the editorial board detects breach of copyright or plagiarism for the manuscripts in review process, they retract the study from review and cancel its review process by sending a detailed document to the author(s) showing what was detected and where in the study.
If the editorial board detects breach of copyright or plagiarism for the articles published in an issue or in early release, the retraction and reporting procedures are applied according to statements indicated below in 1 week at the latest:
- The study which is detected to have plagiarism is labelled as "Retracted:" in the electronic environment.
- Instead of the Abstractand Full Text, the reasons why the study has been retracted, detailed evidence and the statements (if any) of the affiliated institution about the issue are published electronically.
- The study is announced as "Retracted" on the main page of the journal's web page.
- The study is included in the contents of the first issue of the journal to be published after the date of retraction as "Retraction: Article Title", and from its first page onwards the reasons why it has been retracted and the original citations are shared with the public and researchers.
- The institutions that the author(s) is affiliated with are informed about the retraction.
- The retraction reports indicated above are sent to the institutions where the journal is indexed.
Furthermore, if there are any publishers or editorial boards through whom the author(s) had their studies published before, the editorial board of PEGEGOG can make suggestions to these parties that the published studies of the author(s) who has plagiarized should be reviewed for validity and reliability or be retracted.
For appeal against editorial decisions:
If the authors disagree with the editorial decision on their manuscripts they have a right to appeal.
Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision should contact the Editor-in-Chief (use manuscript submission page-add discussion). In such cases the Editor-in-Chief will review the manuscript, editorial and peer reviewers' comments and give his/her decision for accepting or rejecting a manuscript. Editor-in-Chief may, if so required, send the manuscript to a new handling editor for a fresh editorial review and to new referees for peer review. Decision of the Editor-in-Chief in such case will be final.
Editorial matters for complaints related to policies, procedures, editorial content and actions of the editorial staff:
The complaint can be made by writing an email. Ideally the complaint should be made to the person with whom the complainant is in regular contact for the matter being complained about. If due to any reason it is not appropriate or possible to complain to the contact person, please email to [email protected]. All complaints will be acknowledged within five working days.
Complaints handling policy (escalation procedures):
The complaints will be resolved by the person to whom they are made. If the person to whom the complaint is made is not able to deal with the complaint he or she will refer it to the editor. If the complaint cannot be resolved by the editor, it will be referred to the Editor-in-chief. Editor-in-chief For all matters related to the policies, procedures, editorial content and actions of the editorial staff, the decision of the editor-in-chief will be final. If the editor-in-chief is unavailable for any reason, the complaint will be referred to the Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık Eğitim Danışmanlık Hizmetleri Tic. Ltd. Şti. ([email protected]).
All efforts will be made to resolve the complaint as quickly as possible. In some cases, delay in complaint resolution may occur if a response from any third person or organization is required. Until the complaint is resolved, a complaint resolution update will be provided to the complainant, every two weeks, until the complaint is finally resolved.
Editorial matters for complaints related to the conduct of the editor-in-chief:
The complaint can be made by writing an email to [email protected]. Complaints about matters related to PEGEGOG but which are not related to policies, procedures, actions of the editorial staff and editorial content can be made to. All complaints will be acknowledged within five working days.
An article must be prepared and submitted in full compliance with not only national and international laws of ethics but also must respect common standards of ethics accepted by academicians. Therefore, all parties carry the responsibility for respecting principles of ethical standards. Please visit: Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
- Author(s) must not contact persons involved in evaluation process during or before manuscript evaluation.
- Authors are expected to consider carefully the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the original submission. The names of the individuals who do not contribute to the study must not be included among authors. All those who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors. No author names can be added after submission. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the paper (e.g. language editing or medical writing), they should be recognized in the only acknowledgements section.
- If there is a conflict of interest regarding the study, the process under Conflict of Interest must be followed.
- Articles submitted to PEGEGOG must be original. Citations from other sources must be clearly stated. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted and permission has been obtained where necessary.
- Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have influenced the reported work and that give the work appropriate context within the larger scholarly record. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.
- Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
- Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
- Raw data can be requested during the review process. In such a case, authors are asked to provide their raw data as soon as possible.
- Authors are responsible for obtained permissions from related individuals, organizations, etc., if necessary.
- A manuscript cannot be sent to more than one journal at a time for evaluation.
- If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
- For human subjects, the author should ensure that the work described has been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) for experiments involving humans. All animal experiments should comply with the ARRIVE guidelines and should be carried out in accordance with the U.K. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and associated guidelines, or EU Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes] URL
- Appropriate consents, permissions and releases must be obtained where an author wishes to include case details or other personal information or images of patients and any other individuals in publication. Written consents must be retained by the author and copies of the consents or evidence that such consents have been obtained must be provided to PEGEGOG on request.
- WAME define conflict of interest as “a divergence between an individual’s private interests (competing interests) and his or her responsibilities to scientific and publishing activities, such that a reasonable observer might wonder if the individual’s behavior or judgment was motivated by considerations of his or her competing interests”. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could be viewed as inappropriately influencing (bias) their work.
- All sources of financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article should be disclosed, as should the role of the sponsor(s), if any, in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. If the funding source(s) had no such involvement then this should be stated.
- When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper if deemed necessary by the editor. If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains an error, it is the obligation of the author to cooperate with the editor, including providing evidence to the editor where requested.
- Have you obtained official permissions for data collection/use, etc.?
- If you have used copyrighted materials, have you received copyright permissions?
- If you have used data, tools, or procedures from previously published sources, have you obtained necessary permissions from persons or institutions that can claim copyright?
- Have you cited the information from other published sources appropriately?
- Have you obtained consent letters from your participants or can you provide answers to the questions from the Editor regarding this issue?
- If you have used animals in your study, have you applied the procedures within appropriate limits?
- Have you taken necessary precautions to maintain the confidentiality and safety of the participants or other parties participated in your study?
- If there is more than one author, has each author read and agreed on the content of the submitted version?
- The editor of a learned journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding issues such as libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making these decisions.
- The editors take as references the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) “Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors”. This has a large resource on the topic of ethical conduct of journal editors, authors and reviewers. PEGEGOG also has an extensive number of resources to help new and established editors to undertake their role as editors.
- The editor shall ensure that the peer review process (double-blind reviewers) is fair, unbiased, and timely. Research articles must typically be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers, and where necessary the editor should seek additional opinions. The editor shall select reviewers who have suitable expertise in the relevant field and shall follow best practice in avoiding the selection of fraudulent peer reviewers. The editor shall review all disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and suggestions for self-citation made by reviewers in order to determine whether there is any potential for bias.
- The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
- The editorial policies of the journal should encourage transparency and complete, honest reporting, and the editor should ensure that peer reviewers and authors have a clear understanding of what is expected of them. The editor shall use the journal’s standard electronic submission system for all journal communications.
- The editor shall establish, along with the publisher, a transparent mechanism for appeal against editorial decisions.
- The editor must not attempt to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric. In particular, the editor shall not require that references to that (or any other) journal’s articles be included except for genuine scholarly reasons and authors should not be required to include references to the editor’s own articles or products and services in which the editor has an interest.
- The editor must protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. In exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the publisher, the editor may share limited information with editors of other journals where deemed necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct. The editor must protect reviewers’ identities. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
- Any potential editorial conflicts of interest should be declared to the publisher in writing prior to the appointment of the editor, and then updated if and when new conflicts arise. The publisher may publish such declarations in the journal.
- The editor must not be involved in decisions about papers which s/he has written him/herself or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Further, any such submission must be subject to all of the journal’s usual procedures, peer review must be handled independently of the relevant author/editor and their research groups, and there must be a clear statement to this effect on any such paper that is published. The editor should work to safeguard the integrity of the published record by reviewing and assessing reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, reviewer and editorial), in conjunction with the publisher (or society).
- Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies. The editor shall further make appropriate use of the publisher’s systems for the detection of misconduct, such as plagiarism.
- An editor presented with convincing evidence of misconduct should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to arrange the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other correction to the record, as may be relevant
- Storing all records.
- Supporting freedom of thought.
- To offer expertise in their specialist area.
- To review submitted manuscripts.
- To advise on journal policy and scope.
- To work with the Editor to ensure ongoing development of the journal.
- Which would promote the journal, which they might also help to organize and/or guest edit.
- To attract new and established authors and article submissions.
- To submit some of their own work for consideration, ensuring that they adhere to Conflict of Interest rules and stating their relationship to the journal.
- Reviewers should agree to review submissions only relevant to their specific fields.
- Reviewers should not Access to information about author(s) identity. In case of accessing or receiving such information, evaluation process must be ended.
- The evaluation process should be completed in total objectivity and confidentiality. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. If a reviewer suggests that an author includes citations to the reviewer’s (or their associates’) work, this must be for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing the reviewer’s citation count or enhancing the visibility of their work (or that of their associates).
- If reviewers believe that there is a conflict of interest, they should reject to evaluate the manuscript and inform the Editor on the issue. Reviewers should consult the Editor before agreeing to review a paper where they have potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
- Reviewers can use the content of the manuscripts they evaluate only after acceptance. They cannot use any information from the manuscripts rejected for publication.
- Evaluation process must be completed objectively on the content of the manuscript. Personal characteristics such as nationality, gender, religion, political views, or commercial conflicts must not interfere with the reviewers’ decisions.
- Reviewers should have a constructive and polite attitude towards submitted work. They should avoid degrading or offensive language in communication with authors.
- Reviewers should comply with evaluation deadlines and ethical responsibilities.
- Editors are fully responsible for publication processes. Because editors hold the responsibility of decisions on the submissions and published articles, the Publisher declares and guarantees free editor decisions to be maintained.
- The Publisher holds the right of property and copyright of each published work and has the responsibility to keep a copy.
- The Publisher has the responsibility to take all the precautions to avoid scientific exploitation, plagiarism crimes against the Editor. The publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.
- The Publisher promote best practice by offering editors membership of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
A sound scientific method is based on reproducibility and verifiability. Data, including visual materials, cannot be manipulated, changed, or reduced in order to verify research hypotheses or to obtain desirable results.
In case there is a mistake in the published version of an article, the author(s) must announce the mistake(s) to the audience. When such a mistake is recognized by the author(s), the Editor is informed for correction. Each corrected version and the corrections made are announced to the audience on the Journal’s website.
In case the reliability of the submitted research is questioned, author(s) are responsible to provide the data used to the Editor. If authors fail to provide their data, the submission is rejected and is not accepted for evaluation again. Authors are required to store the data, applications procedures, and other materials utilized in their submissions for at least 5 years. After publication, if other researchers or authors request, data can be shared. Before sharing data, information, codes, or symbols about participants’/subjects’ identities must be deleted. If a study is funded by an institution, the rights of the institution must be protected and relevant acknowledgement must be added. If authors desire to share data, there must be a signed letter of agreement between the author(s) and the owner(s) of the data regarding the aim(s), the method(s), the scope, the conditions, and the limits for the use of the data.
Re-publishing data refers to when findings from an accepted paper are re-used in another publication as if original. Re-publishing is an act of violation of copyright and related regulations because an author cannot give copyright permission for the same work to more than one entity. All or part of a previously published work cannot be published again or cited over the appropriate limits. A previously published work or one with significantly similar scope cannot be submitted for publication again. Papers presented in conferences but not published in conference proceedings can be submitted for publication by stating the conference at which the paper was presented in a footnote. Papers which have been presented and published in conference proceedings cannot be submitted for publication.
In case authors wish their work to reach other audience, the following conditions must be met to re-publish the results:
- The re-published version must be considerably shorter than the original one.
- A notification that the work has been previously published and relevant referencing must be clearly given in a footnote.
- If the tables, graphs, or other visuals that have been used in the previously published version are used in re-publication, this must be clearly stated and referenced in a footnote.
- The original work must be properly added to the references list.
Findings should be presented in unity and should not be presented in only some parts. Publishing multiple studies each of which cover a part of the same bulk of findings can be misleading. However, in cases where research has a wider scope, conducted during long periods, or has interdisciplinary focus, multiple studies based on the same data source can be published. When studies have interdisciplinary nature, publishing findings on one source may not be sufficient. If studies are conducted in a long period, findings obtained in different phases of this period can contribute to the field, and thus these can be published provided the phase is stated. In this case, the research based on previous phases needs to be cited. If a study conducted in long period is published following the studies based on the findings from previous phases, repeating the same findings should be avoided and quotes from such previous work should be cited.
The Editor should be notified when multiple studies based on the same research are submitted for evaluation. The editor decides whether the secondary studies meet the publication requirements.
Authors cannot use other researchers’ opinions or thoughts as their own. Similarly, authors cannot use thoughts, opinions, and parts of research from their own previous work without citing properly.
Confidentiality of the information obtained from participants should be maintained. Therefore, submitted work must not include information about participants’ identity. Participants should agree to be involved in research and when there is a hierarchical relationship between the researcher and the participants (e.g., teacher-student, director-teacher, etc.), researchers must not pressure participants to give consent. Particularly, in case an academician perceives his or her students as “potential subjects”, this would lead to misleading or subjective data resulting from reluctant responses from students and to violating participants’ rights and interests. Therefore, a special care should be given not to force students to participate.
If a study is based on the evaluation of a product or a service, the author(s) must not have a conflict of interest or a commercial benefit with the institution or the organization. In case there is a conflict of interest or such a potential, this should be indicated in the study as a limitation even if it is thought not to influence objectivity of the results.
Authorship right is gained by contributing considerably to research and by taking the responsibility of a published work. Considerable contribution may refer to: formulizing research problems or hypotheses, developing research design or application procedures, conducting statistical analyses, interpreting results of analyses, or writing part of a study. Individuals contributing to such processes are listed among the authors of the study. Individuals who contribute to a study other than mentioned means are cited in footnotes explaining their contributions. These contributors can help research by helping to create data collection tools, giving advice on data analysis methods, helping in data collection process, assisting to reach participants, or conducting routine observations.
In order to determine the order of authors in author list, each author is evaluated based on his or her contributions to the study and the one who has contributed most is written at the top of the list. When the contributions of the authors are thought to be equal, the list is done in alphabetical order and a note explaining the order of the list is added. Organizational or professional status or titles are not considered as a factor in deciding on the order of author list.
According to Article 35 of Intellectual and Arts Copyright Act Number 5846 (and Act number 4630 that changed it), any type of information taken from other sources must be cited and referenced. Act Number 4630 states that:
“Article 35 – Other sources can be quoted in the following cases:
- Quoting sentences or parts from publicly known work in a scientific or literary work;
- Including themes, patterns, passages, or parts from its characteristics of a previously published musical composition into musical work;
- Including acceptable portions of publicly known work of art or other published work in a scientific work in a way that the included part or the whole is clarified and its content is explained;
- Including acceptable portions of publicly known work of art in scientific conferences or lessons and using projections to show in order to talk about or explain the work.
Quotes or integrations must be made clear. The parts of the work quoted or integrated must be clearly and properly cited.
In case the limits explained in the Act are violated, the act is considered as a crime and imposes punishment regulated in Article 71 of Act Number 4630:
“Article 71 - (Changed Article: 01/11/1983 -2936/Article 11; Changed Article: 23/01/2008-5728 S.K./ Article 138)
Violating intellectual and art work moral, commercial or relevant rights protected under this Article:
- Individuals using, reproducing, changing, distributing, broadcasting using any audio or visual means, publishing, or selling illegally produced copies, lending, renting, purchasing for commercial purposes, importing or exporting, keeping for non-personal needs, or storing a work of art, a performance, a phonogram, or a production without obtaining legal permission from its owner are sentenced to imprisonment between 1 and 5 years and are fined.
- Individuals giving their names to the work of others are sentenced between 6 months and 2 years and are fined. If this act is followed by distributing or publishing the work, upper limit of imprisonment is 5 years and no fine is applied.
- Individuals discussing the content of others’ work publicly without obtaining legal permission are sentenced up to 6 months imprisonment.
- Individuals citing other work wrongly, insufficiently or misleadingly are sentenced up to 6 months imprisonment.
- Individuals reproducing, distributing, or publishing others’ work, performances, phonograms, or products using other well-known individuals’ names are sentenced to imprisonment between 3 months and 1 year and are fined.
Individuals who commit crimes stated in Paragraph 1 of the Additional Article 4 of this Act and individuals who provide content information and continue to commit the crimes mentioned are sentenced to imprisonment between 3 months and 1 year in case there are no other reasons for harsher penalties.
If individuals who sell or buy illegally reproduced, distributed, or published others’ work, performances, phonograms, or products reports the names of people from whom they have obtained the work before prosecution process may receive remission or may not be sentenced at all.”