Publication Ethics | Cyberspace, Space, and Law Review

This is an English translation. In case of discrepancy, the Turkish version prevails.

Core principles

The Review's acceptance and publication processes serve the impartial and reliable development and dissemination of knowledge. These processes reflect directly on the quality of the work of authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed publication is a means of embodying and supporting the scientific method.

For this reason, all stakeholders in the process, namely authors, readers and researchers, the publisher, reviewers and editors, are required to observe ethical standards.

The Review adopts the following principles and regulations:

The principles and flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
The joint "Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing" of COPE, DOAJ, OASPA and WAME
The Directive on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics of Higher Education Institutions (Türkiye)

Actions contrary to research and publication ethics

Plagiarism: Presenting the ideas, methods, data, practices, writings, figures or works of others, in part or in full, as one's own without citing their owners in accordance with scholarly rules.
Fabrication: Producing data not based on research; basing a submitted or published work on data that are not real; reporting or publishing such data; presenting research that was not carried out as if it had been.
Falsification: Tampering with research records and data; presenting methods, devices and materials that were not used as if they had been; excluding data that do not fit the hypothesis; manipulating data and results to fit a theory or assumption; distorting or shaping results in the interests of the persons and organisations providing support.
Duplicate publication: Seeking to republish a work containing the same results of a study without disclosing or citing the earlier publication.
Salami slicing: Dividing the results of a study into parts in a way that undermines its integrity and publishing them as several publications without cross-citation.
Unjustified authorship: Including persons who made no active contribution among the authors; omitting persons who made an active contribution; changing the order of authors without justification; removing the names of active contributors from the work at publication or in later versions; using one's influence to be listed as an author without having contributed.

Other ethical breaches

Failing to acknowledge the persons, institutions or organisations that supported a funded study, and their contributions.
Using theses or studies that have not yet been submitted or defended as sources without the owner's permission.
Failing to comply with ethical rules in research on humans and animals.
Sharing information from a work submitted for review with others before publication without the express permission of its author.
Misusing resources, premises, facilities and equipment provided for scientific research.
Making unfounded, unwarranted and deliberate allegations of ethical misconduct.
Publishing data from surveys, interviews and attitude studies obtained without the explicit consent of participants or, where the research is conducted in an institution, without the institution's permission.
Harming animal health and the ecological balance in research and experiments.
Failing to obtain in writing from the competent bodies the permissions required before starting research.
Acting contrary to legislation or to the provisions on research and experiments of international agreements to which Türkiye is a party.
Failing to comply with the obligation to inform and warn those concerned about possible harmful practices related to the research.
Failing to use data and information obtained from other persons and institutions to the extent and in the manner permitted, and failing to respect their confidentiality and ensure their protection.
Making false or misleading statements about scientific research and publications in academic appointments and promotions.

Principles of research ethics

Scholarly integrity, transparency and academic quality are the basis of all stages of research. Research processes are recorded so that they can be audited when necessary.
Participants are informed clearly and comprehensibly about the purpose, method, possible risks and benefits of the research. Participation following this information rests on free will.
The confidentiality of participants' personal data is protected. The principles of anonymity, privacy and data security are observed. Data are used for scholarly purposes only and stored securely.
Participation is voluntary. Participants may withdraw from the research at any time without giving reasons.
Measures are taken to ensure that participants suffer no physical, psychological, social or economic harm. Particular attention is paid to ethical rules and legislation in studies involving vulnerable groups.
Researchers maintain their scholarly independence. Conflicts of interest, financial support and sponsorship are declared openly.
Where required, ethics committee approval and institutional permissions are obtained before the research begins.

Responsibilities of authors

The submitted work is original. Where other studies are used, they are cited fully and accurately.
All circumstances and relationships that may give rise to a conflict of interest are disclosed at submission.
Raw data relating to the work may be requested during review. Authors should be ready to provide these data and information to the editorial board.
Authors should be able to document that they hold the rights to use the data and the permissions required for the research.
An author who notices an error in a published work or a work under review informs the editor at once and cooperates with the editor on correction or retraction.
The same work may not be submitted to more than one journal at the same time. A new submission may be made only after the earlier submission has been concluded.
Everyone listed as an author must have made a significant contribution to the work and approved the final text. In works with more than one author, author contributions are declared using the CRediT taxonomy.

Responsibilities of editors

General responsibilities

Meeting the information needs of readers and authors
Continuously improving the Review
Running processes that improve the quality of published works
Supporting freedom of thought
Protecting academic integrity
Working without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards
Acting openly and transparently on matters requiring correction or clarification

Relations with readers

Editors make decisions with regard to the knowledge, skills and experience that readers, researchers and practitioners need.
They ensure that published works are original and contribute to the field.
They take account of feedback from readers and respond with explanations.

Relations with authors

Editors make decisions based on the importance, originality and validity of the work, the clarity of its presentation and the aims and scope of the Review.
They pass works that fall within the scope and have no serious problems through initial screening.
They do not disregard positive reviewer recommendations unless there is a serious problem.
New editors do not change decisions made by previous editors unless there is a serious problem.
They provide authors with explanatory and informative notifications.

Relations with reviewers

They select reviewers according to the subject of the work.
They provide reviewers with the information and guidance needed for review.
They check whether there is a conflict of interest between authors and reviewers.
They encourage reviewers to assess the work in impartial, scholarly and objective language.
They evaluate reviewers by criteria such as timely response and the quality of reports.
They keep the reviewer pool up to date.
They prevent discourteous and unscholarly reviews.

Responsibilities of reviewers

They agree to review only works within their field of expertise.
They carry out the review impartially and confidentially.
If they consider that there is a conflict of interest, they decline the review and inform the editor.
They destroy the reviewed work at the end of the process. They may use only the final published version of the work.
They base the review on the content of the work alone. They do not allow nationality, gender, religion, political views or commercial considerations to influence the review.
They use constructive and courteous language. They make no personal comments that are hostile, defamatory or insulting.
They complete reviews they have accepted on time.
They do not upload the work, or any part of it, to any artificial intelligence tool.

Responsibilities of the Publisher

The Publisher does not interfere with editorial decisions.
It provides the infrastructure and resources needed for the Review to be published free of charge and with open access.
It secures permanent access to and archiving of published works.
It protects personal data in accordance with the law.

Ethics committee approval

Ethics committee approval is mandatory for all studies that collect data from human participants. Examples of such studies include:

Surveys, interviews, focus groups, observation and experiments
Studies using data sets containing personal data (e.g. model training or analysis with user data)
Use of scales, in which case permission is also obtained from the owner of the scale
Clinical or biomedical research

The name of the ethics committee and the date and number of its decision are stated in the methods section and on the title page of the work. Works that require ethics committee approval but do not have it are not considered.

As a rule, the following studies do not require ethics committee approval. The author states this, with reasons, on the title page:

Legal research based on the analysis of legislation, case law and legal scholarship
Studies using publicly available documents and data
Secondary analyses of properly anonymised data sets
Reviews and theoretical discussions

Detection of plagiarism

The Review checks all submitted works with iThenticate or equivalent software. Where plagiarism is found in a submitted or published work, action is taken in line with the COPE flowcharts.

Use of artificial intelligence

The rules on the use of artificial intelligence are set out in section 16 of the Publication Principles page. The use of artificial intelligence is declared in the Author Declaration and License Form. The authors bear full responsibility for such use.

Conflict of interest

Financial, institutional or personal relationships that may influence the decisions of an author, reviewer or editor constitute a conflict of interest. Authors declare such relationships on the title page. Reviewers and editors take no part in handling a work in which they have a conflict of interest.

In empirical and technical studies, authors are encouraged to share their data sets and code in an open repository (e.g. Zenodo, GitHub). The title page includes a data availability statement. Reasons are given for data that cannot be shared.

Confidentiality

Personal data sent to the Review are protected. Data relating to authors, reviewers and other natural persons are not shared with third parties or institutions except where publication processes require it. Details are on the Turkish Personal Data Protection Law (KVKK) Privacy Notice page.

Correction, retraction and expression of concern

Where editors find minor errors in a published work that do not affect the findings and conclusions, they publish a correction. In cases of major errors or breaches that invalidate the findings and conclusions, they retract the work. COPE principles apply to these actions. The procedure is set out in section 13 of the Publication Principles page.

Complaints and appeals

Complaints and appeals concerning content, procedures or policies for which the Review or its board members are responsible are sent to the address on the Contact page. Complaints and appeals are examined carefully and assessed in line with COPE principles.