ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR EDITORS
1. Publication Decision
JOAEP editors are responsible for deciding which articles will be accepted for publication. This decision is based on the validation of the article and the contribution of the article to the researchers and readers. In doing so, the Editor is guided by the policies of the editorial board and is subject to the laws that must be enforced against defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors can discuss with other editors or reviewers in making decisions.
2. Assessment Purpose
Editors evaluate manuscripts based on intellectual content without discrimination of religion, ethnicity, race, gender, etc.
Editors and editorial staff may not publish any information about manuscripts that have been received to anyone, other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the editorial board.
4. Conflict of Interest
The submitted article has not been published and may not be used for the personal benefit of the editor without written permission from the author. Information or ideas obtained through double-blind review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Editors must refuse to review a manuscript if the editor has a conflict of interest, caused by a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with the author, company, or institution associated with the manuscript.
5. Cooperation in Investigation
Editors must take responsive steps if ethical complaints about accepted manuscripts or published articles exist. The editor may contact the scriptwriter and consider the complaint. Editors can also communicate more with research-related institutions or institutions. Once the complaint has been resolved, matters such as revision of publications, withdrawals, or other records, should be considered.
ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR REVIEWERS
1. Contributions to the Decision Editor
Blind peer review by reviewers assists editors in making decisions and can assist authors in improving articles through communication between reviewers and authors. Peer review is an important component of formal scientific communication (formal scientific communication) and scientific approaches.
If the assigned reviewer feels qualified to conduct a manuscript review or is unable to conduct the review on time, the assigned reviewer must immediately notify the editor.
Every manuscript that has been accepted for review is a confidential document. The manuscript may not be shown or discussed with others except as permitted by the editor.
The review must be done objectively. Personal criticism of the author is not allowed. Reviewers must express their clear opinions accompanied by supporting arguments.
5. Completeness and Reference Authenticity
Reviewers must identify reference sources that have not been cited by the author's written statements/arguments and must be accompanied by relevant quotations. To the best of the reviewer's knowledge, the reviewer must notify the editor of any substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and other published articles.
6. Conflict of Interest
Unpublished articles may not be used for the reviewer's research without the written permission of the author. Information or ideas obtained through peer reviewers must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. The reviewer must reject the manuscript being reviewed if the reviewer has a conflict of interest caused by a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with the author, company, or institution related to the work.
ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR AUTHORS
1. Writing Standard
The author should present the discussion and importance of the research in the manuscript. Research data must be presented accurately. Articles must be sufficiently detailed with sufficient references to allow others to replicate the work. Articles containing inaccurate data constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
2. Research Data Access
Authors may be required to provide raw data on paper for review and must be able to provide public access to such data where possible and must be able to retain data for a reasonable period after publication.
3. Originality and Plagiarism
Plagiarism in any form is unethical behavior in the publication of scientific papers and is not acceptable. The author must ensure that all works are original, and if the author has quoted the work and/or words of others, the author must include appropriate citations. There are various forms of plagiarism, such as acknowledging other people's writings as your own, copying or rewriting substantial parts of other people's work without citing sources, and claiming the results of research conducted by others. Self-plagiarism or auto plagiarism is a form of plagiarism. Auto plagiarism is quoting or using sentences from his own previously published work without citing the source.
4. Article Submission Terms
Authors may not publish the same manuscript in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal is unethical behavior in the publication of scientific papers and is unacceptable.
5. Reference Source
Authors must include the source of reference for each article referenced in the manuscript. Information obtained personally, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties, may not be used or reported without the written permission of the source of the information.
An author is a person who has made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the writing of the article. All parties who have contributed significantly to the writing of the article are listed as co-authors. Corresponding authors must ensure that all co-authors have been included in the manuscript, and all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript and have approved the submission of the manuscript for publication.
7. Error in Publishing
When the author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in a published article, the author is responsible for notifying the journal editor and working with the editor to retract or correct the text. If the editor gets information from a third party that the work contains a significant publication error, it is the author's responsibility to immediately withdraw or make corrections to the editor or provide evidence regarding the authenticity of the article.