Code of Ethics

Ethics Committee Permission is required since January 2022 and articles that do not receive Ethics Committee Permission will not be accepted. In studies that require ethics committee permission, information about the permission (name of the committee, date and number) should be added at the end of the article as follows “Ethics committee approval of this article was taken from ............. (Name of the committee), with ....... (Date), ......... (Number).” In case reports, information about the informed voluntary consent/consent form being signed should be included within the method section of the article.

To be implemented in 2020, the TR Index Journal Evaluation criteria have been updated, and the articles related to ethics committee approval, which should be required especially in scientific research, have been detailed. It is not expected that the “documents and information requested for studies requiring ethics committee approval”, which is stated under the heading of ethical rules, will be applied to studies that have been submitted in the past, are in the process of evaluation or accepted. It will be mandatory for publications whose process begins in 2022.


Explanation and Information on TR Index Ethical Rules

Studies that require the Ethics Committee Permission are as follows:

All kinds of research carried out with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from the participants by using survey, interview, focus group work, observation, experiment, interview techniques,

The use of humans and animals (including material/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes,

Clinical studies on humans,

Animal studies,

Retrospective studies in accordance with the personal data protection law,


Stating that an “informed consent form” was taken in case reports,

For the use of scales, surveys and photographs belonging to others, permission must be obtained from the owners, and it must be stated from which institution, on which date and with which decision or number.

It should be stated that the intellectual and artistic works used are in compliance with the copyright regulations.

If the study requires the use of human and animal subjects, it should be declared that the study was carried out in accordance with the international declaration, guideline, etc.

Note: Non-university researchers can also apply to the Ethics Committees in their regions.


The publication processes adopted by the Journal of Social Sciences form the basis for the development and distribution of information in an objective and respectful manner. The processes implemented in this direction are directly reflected in the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support the authors. Peer-reviewed studies embody and support the scientific method. At this point, it is important that all participants of the process (authors, readers, researchers, publisher, reviewers, and editors) comply with the standards for ethical principles. The Journal of Social Sciences expects all stakeholders to bear the following ethical responsibilities within the scope of publication ethics.

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



All references should be listed in the bibliography.

Plagiarism and false data should not be included.

The same manuscript or research should not be attempted to be published in more than one journal.  

Actions against scientific research and publication ethics are as follows:

a) Plagiarism: Presenting ideas, methods, data, practices, writings, figures or works of others as their own work, in whole or in part, without attribution in accordance with scientific rules.

b) Falsification: Producing data that is not based on research, to edit or change the presented or published work based on false data, to report or publish them, presenting research that has not been done as if it has been done.

c) Distortion: Distorting the research records and obtained data, to present the methods, devices and materials not used in the research as if they were used, not evaluating the data that are not suitable for the research hypothesis, to manipulate the data and/or results in order to fit the relevant theory or assumptions, to distort or shape the research results in line with the interests of the people and organizations that is received fund.

d) Duplicate publication: Presenting more than one work containing the same results of a research as separate works in associate professor examination evaluations and academic promotions.

e) Salami slicing: Presenting the results of a research as separate works in the evaluations of associate professorship exams and in academic promotions by improperly disaggregating the results of the research and making multiple publications without attribution.

f) Authorship misconduct: Including people who do not contribute actively among the authors, and not including people who have active contributions, changing the order of authors without justification and inappropriately, removing the names of those who contributed actively from the work at the time of publication or in subsequent editions, using his influence to include her/his name among the authors, although s/he does not have an active contribution.

g) Other types of ethical violations: Not clearly stating the funding people, institutions or organizations and their contributions to the research in the publications of the research carried out with support; not following the ethical rules in research on humans and animals; not respecting the rights of patients in publications; sharing the information in a work that you assigned as a reviewer before publishing; sharing and misusing the resources, places, facilities and devices provided or reserved for scientific research, accusing with unfounded, improper and intentional ethical violation (YÖK Instruction of Scientific Research and Publication Ethics, Article 8).



All authors in the study must make significant contribution to the study. In articles with two or more authors, the contribution rates of the authors should be stated at the end of the article. i.e., 1. Author 50%, 2. Author 50% or 1. Author 40%, 2. Author 30%, 3. Author 30%.

It is necessary to declare that all data in the article are accurate and original.

The authors should state at the end of the article that they do not have any personal or financial conflicts of interest with other people and institutions related to the research.

An acknowledgement statement should be included at the end of the article, if there are institutions and organizations that support and contribute to the study.

All authors must ensure retraction and correction of inaccuracies.  



Evaluations should be objective.

Reviewers should not have a conflict of interest with the research, authors and/or research funders.

Reviewers should remark the relevant published, but not cited works.

Reviewed articles should be kept confidential.

Reviewers must submit a clear and constructive evaluation report on the work within the specified time.



Editors have full responsibility and authority to accept or reject an article.  

Editors should not have a conflict of interest regarding the accepted or rejected articles.

Only the articles that will contribute to the field should be accepted.

Editors should support the publication of corrections or withdrawal when errors are found.

Editors should keep the reviewers confidential and prevent plagiarism and false data.  

The editor and the editorial board keep the referee evaluation process confidential and do not share it with third parties.

Regardless of religion, language, race, gender, nationality, seniority or institutional affiliation, the editor and the editorial board display an impartial attitude to every work submitted to the journal and approved for publication.


The peer-review process is at the heart of the success of scientific publication. It is part of our commitment protecting and improving the peer-review process, and the Journal of Social Sciences has an obligation to assist the scientific community in all aspects of publishing ethics, particularly in cases of problematical, duplicate publications, or plagiarism.

When the reader notices an important error or inaccuracy in an article published in the Journal of Social Sciences or has any criticisms about the editorial content (plagiarism, duplicate articles, etc.), they can make a complaint by sending an e-mail to the address We welcome complaints as they provide an opportunity for us to improve, and we aim to respond quickly and constructively.  



Manuscripts sent to the Journal of Social Sciences for publication are subject to double-blind peer-review evaluation by at least two reviewers. Additionally, by means of a special program used for plagiarism detection, it is confirmed that the articles have not been published before and do not contain any plagiarism.