Guidelines

Author's Guide

Duties and Responsibilities of Authors

Authorship and Contribution
Authorship should be limited to those who made significant contributions to the conception, design, conduct or interpretation of the study. All significant contributors should be listed as co-authors. If there were minor contributors to the study, e.g. language editing, they should be acknowledged in the acknowledgments section. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission for publication. Authors are expected to carefully review the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and to provide the final author list at the time of original submission. Only in exceptional circumstances will the editor consider the addition, deletion or rearrangement of authors after the manuscript has been submitted. All authors must agree to any such addition, deletion or reorganization. Authors take joint responsibility for the work.

Author Change Requests
Addition, deletion or rearrangement of author names in the author list can only be made before the manuscript is accepted and only if approved by the Editor of the journal.
If such a change is requested, the Editor will request from the responsible author (a) the reason for the change in the author list and (b) written confirmation (e-mail) from all authors that they agree to the addition. Only in exceptional cases will the Editor consider the addition, deletion or reorganization of authors after the article has been accepted.

Article Writing
Authors of original research papers should address the topic in an original way and with an objective discussion. The paper should include sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly false statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Authenticity
The author must ensure that the article is original, has not been previously published elsewhere, and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, in another language.

Using Original Sources and Citation
Authors should ensure that they are writing entirely original work and, if they have used the work or words of others, that it is properly cited. Privately obtained information, such as in conversations, correspondence or discussions with third parties, should not be used without the express written permission of the source.

Data Access and Preservation
Authors may be asked to provide research data supporting their articles for editorial review and/or to comply with the journal's open data requirements. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if possible, and to retain such data for a reasonable period after publication. The journal recommends uploading research data to TUBITAK's Aperta Portal.

Multiple and Simultaneous Publication
An author should not publish the same research article in more than one journal. It is unethical to submit the same article to more than one journal at the same time. An author should not submit a previously published article for consideration in another journal, except in the form of an abstract.

Publication of Studies Based on Surveys and Interviews
For research in all disciplines that require ethics committee approval (ethics committee approval must be obtained, this approval must be stated and documented in the article. In researches requiring ethics committee approval, information about the approval (name of the committee, date and number) should be included in the method section, as well as on one of the first/last pages of the article; in case reports, information on the signing of the informed consent form should be included in the article.

Conflict of Interest
Any financial or other interest that may cause the person to be conflicted in his/her work, significantly impair his/her objectivity, or provide an unfair advantage in favor of any person or organization. All sources of financial support received during the conduct of the research and preparation of the manuscript and the role of sponsors in the study should be disclosed. If there is no source of funding, this should also be indicated. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include consultancies, salaries, grants. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

Error Reporting
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her published work, he/she should notify the journal immediately. It is also the author's obligation to cooperate in withdrawing or correcting the manuscript if deemed necessary by the editor. If the editor or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains errors, it is the author's obligation to cooperate with the editor, including informing the editor.

Image Integrity
It is not acceptable to enhance, darken, move, remove or add a specific feature in an image. Authors must adhere to the policy for graphic images implemented by the journal.

Editor's Guide

Selection of Editors
Editors are selected from among experts who have a PhD degree and have publications in accordance with the scope of the journal.

Duties and Responsibilities of the Editors
Coordinate the Referee Process
The editor should ensure that the peer review process is fair, impartial and timely. Research articles should be reviewed by at least two external reviewers, and the editor should seek additional feedback when necessary.

Identification of Reviewers
The Editor will select reviewers with appropriate expertise in the relevant field, taking into account the need for appropriate, inclusive and diverse representation. The Editor will follow best practices to avoid the selection of fraudulent reviewers.

Protecting Confidentiality
The editor must maintain the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the authors and reviewers concerned. In exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the publisher, the editor may share limited information with editors of other journals where the editor deems it necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct. The editor must protect the identity of reviewers. Information contained in a submitted manuscript should not be used in the editor's own research without the express written permission of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained during the refereeing process should be kept confidential and should not be used for personal gain.

Neutrality
The editor should evaluate manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.

Investigation of Allegations
An editor who finds convincing evidence of ethical violations should contact the Editorial Board and the Publisher to have the manuscript corrected, retracted, or otherwise amended.

Conflict of Interest
The editor should not be involved in decisions about manuscripts written by him/herself or by family members. Furthermore, such a paper should be subject to all the usual procedures of the journal. The editor should follow the COPE guidelines on disclosure of potential conflicts of interest by authors and reviewers.

Publication Decision
The Editor is responsible for reviewing the referee reports and deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published. The editor must comply with the policies set by the Editorial Board.

Request for Citation to the Journal
The editor should not attempt to influence the ranking of the journal by artificially increasing any journal metric. The editor will not request that articles from his/her journal or any other journal be cited, except for scientific reasons.

Correction, Withdrawal, Publication of an Expression of Concern
Editors may consider publishing a correction if minor errors are identified in the published article that do not affect the findings, interpretations and conclusions. Editors should consider retracting the manuscript if there are major errors/violations that invalidate the findings and conclusions. Editors should consider issuing a statement of concern if there is evidence that the findings are unreliable and that the authors' institutions have not investigated the incident, or if the possible investigation seems unfair or inconclusive, if there is a possibility of research or publication misconduct by the authors. COPE guidelines are followed regarding correction, retraction or expression of concern.

Referee Guide

Below is the article review process, advice on how to become a reviewer and how to write a good review. Also included are our terms and conditions for reviewing, based on the COPE Principles, which provide more information on how to conduct an objective and constructive review.
Our journal adopts a double blind reviewing model.

Selection of Reviewers
Referees are selected from among experts who hold a PhD degree and have publications in the field of science to which the article relates. The information of experts from Turkish universities can be accessed from YÖK Academic website and the information of experts from abroad can be accessed from Publons.

Duties and Responsibilities of Referees
1) Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias and take this into account when reviewing an article. The reviewer should clearly articulate the considerations that support their decision.
2) Contribution to Editorial Decision: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and provides the author with the opportunity to improve the manuscript. In this respect, a reviewer who feels inadequate in reviewing an article or who feels that he/she cannot complete the review in a short time should not accept the invitation to review.
3) Confidentiality: All manuscripts received by the journal for review must be kept confidential. Reviewers should not share reviews or information about the manuscript with anyone or communicate directly with the authors. Information contained in the manuscript should not be used by a reviewer in his/her own research without the express written permission of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
4) Sensitivity to the Ethical Conduct of Research and Publication: Reviewers should be alert to potential ethical issues in the manuscript and report them to the editor.
5) Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should not agree to review a manuscript with potential conflicts of interest arising from their relationship with the authors or the institutions with which the manuscript is affiliated.
6) Referee Citation Request: If a referee suggests that an author include citations to the referee's (or their collaborators') work, this should be for genuine scientific reasons and not to increase the number of citations or the visibility of the referee's work. See also Code of Ethics for Reviewers

Conducting a Review
Referees' evaluations should be objective. During the review process, reviewers are expected to consider the following points.
• Does the article contain new and important information?
• Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the article?
• Is the methodology described in a coherent and understandable way?
• Are the interpretations and conclusions supported by the findings?
• Are adequate references given to other studies in the field?
• Is the language quality adequate?
• Do the abstract/abstract/keywords/keywords accurately reflect the content of the article?

Referee Process Principles

Article Evaluation Process
Our journal accepts academic and original research focusing on the history of sciences and disciplines in the context of Islamic civilization. All manuscripts submitted for publication (including symposium proceedings, book reviews) are subjected to editorial board review, pre-control and referee evaluation processes.

Preliminary Evaluation: The Editorial Board examines the article for compliance with the journal's principles. Unsuitable manuscripts are returned to the author.

Preliminary Control: The article is scanned with plihal.net software. The maximum similarity rate is 20%. It is examined for compliance with the spelling rules and sent to the author for correction if necessary.

Referee Appointment: Manuscripts that pass the preliminary check are sent to at least two referees by double blind refereeing method.

Referee Evaluation: If one of the referee reports is positive and the other is negative, it is sent to the third referee and a final decision is taken in line with the referee's decision.

Revision Process: The recommendations of the Referee and Editorial Board are forwarded to the authors. Authors have the right to object with their justifications.

Final Decision: The Editorial Board decides whether or not to publish the article in line with the referees' opinions.