Peer Review Process
An article is first reviewed by the editor regarding format and scope. The editor may reject a manuscript without further review if it does not fit the scope of the journal. If the manuscript is deemed appropriate for the journal, it is sent to 2 reviewers from the reviewer board. Peer reviewers are experts in their field and are selected from different institutions. Reviewers assess the paper based on the reviewer form. When the reviewers submit two different evaluations of a manuscript, the editor or a third reviewer will assess the manuscript.
The journal has double blind peer review process for all the journal sections except the ediorial section.
JIBA is published twice a year; April and October. The journal may publish a special issue each year at the discretion of the editorial board. The manuscripts for a special issue are subject to the same review process as the manuscripts submitted for regular issues.
The manuscripts that are accepted after the review process and whose process for publication is complete are published electronically as online first articles. Later, these articles are assigned page numbers and published in a future volume and issue. Minor editing may be done on the final version to be published.
Open Access Policy
Journal of Inquiry Based Activities provides immediate open access to its content aiming widespread use and believing that education will improve through sharing scientific knowledge. All content of the journal is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution.
All articles published in JIBA are licensed with "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International Public License". Users are allowed to read, adapt, download, print, or copy the full texts of the articles under the condition of providing references, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. If you build upon the journal material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license.
The article submission and the article processing is completely free of charge.
This journal uses LOCKSS system to support librarys' archiving. To get more info about LOCKSS system click the following link: LOCKSS sistemi konusunda daha fazla bilgi almak isterseniz.
Manuscripts can be submitted in Turkish or English. Title, abstract, and keywords of the manuscripts accepted for publication should be written in both Turkish and English. Manuscripts prepared in Turkish will be translated into English if accepted for publication.
The Journal of Inquiry Based Activities adheres to Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics). The reviewers and authors are expected to follow Guidelines for peer reviewers and Guidelines for authors of COPE.
- Editors' Responsibilities
Publication decisions: The editor is accountable for all of the articles that are published in the journal. The editor decisions are not affected by the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, ethnic origin, or political philosophy. The editor conducts the initial evaluation of the manuscript based on the paper’s importance, originality, and its relevance to the journal's scope.
Confidentiality: The editor and the other editorial staff are responsible for ensuring the confidentiality of any material submitted to the journal while under review.
Disclosure and conflict of interest: Reviewers are asked to reveal any potential conflict of interest before accepting to review a manuscript. Editors do not manage the review process of their own papers.
- Reviewers' Responsibilities
Professional responsibility: Reviewers are expected to accept to review a manuscript if they have the necessary expertise for evaluating the manuscript. The review process assists the editor in making editorial decisions about the manuscripts. The feedback received from the reviewers also guides the authors in improving their papers.
Competing interests: Reviewers should not agree to review manuscripts when they have competing or conflicting interest with the research, authors, or institutions.
Timeliness: Reviewers should agree to review a manuscript if they are able to complete the peer-review process within the proposed time frame. Any referee who cannot fulfill the original agreement should notify the editor and either require an extension or withdraw from the review process.
Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat the manuscripts received for review as confidential documents. They must refrain from disclosing the content of the manuscript or discussing it with others unless obtaining permission from the journal.
Bias: Reviews should be conducted objectively and should not be affected by the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, ethnic origin, or political philosophy. Referees should write their evaluation of the manuscript using supporting arguments.
Suspicion of ethics violations: When reviewers notice any misconduct occurred during the research process or writing the paper or any ethical concern, they should contact the editor.
- Authors' Responsibilities
Soundness and reliability: The authors should be ethical in conducting their research and writing the manuscript.
Honesty: Authors should present their original research reports accurately and provide an objective discussion of its significance. A manuscript should include sufficient information for other researchers to replicate the work.
Originality: Authors should certify that their work is unique and original. Authors should not submit papers describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal is considered as an unethical publishing behavior and is not acceptable.
Transparency: All sources of research funding should be disclosed.
Authorship of the paper: Authorship should include people who have significantly contributed to the design, implementation, and/or analysis of the research data and/or to drafting or revising the article. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper.
Plagiarism and acknowledgement of sources: Authors are responsible for ensuring the submitted work is not plagiarized. If the research is based on prior research, appropriate citation should be reported.
Accountability and responsibility: Manuscripts should be written according to author guidelines. Authors should notify the editor if they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work.
- Consequences of Publication Fraud and Plagiarism
Publication fraud and plagiarism in submitted manuscript: The manuscript will be rejected. The authors will be informed with a letter explaining the plagiarism detected in their work. If it is a major plagiarism, the authors’ institutions will be notified.
Publication fraud and plagiarism in published manuscript: The authors will be informed with a letter explaining the plagiarism detected in their work. If it is a major plagiarism, the authors’ institutions will be notified and the article will be retracted.
Albert, T., & Wager, E. (2003). How to handle authorship disputes: A guide for new researchers. The COPE Report. Retrieved from https://publicationethics.org/files/2003pdf12_0.pdf
Committee on Publication Ethics. (2017). Code of conduct. Retrieved from https://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct
COPE Council. (2017) Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers. Retrieved from www.publicationethics.org
Wager, E. (2011). How should editors respond to plagiarism? COPE discussion paper. Retrieved from https://publicationethics.org/files/COPE_plagiarism_discussion_%20doc_26%20Apr%2011.pdf
Wager, E., & Kleinert, S. (2011). Responsible research publication: international standards for authors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. Chapter 50 in: Mayer T & Steneck N (eds) Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment. Imperial College Press / World Scientific Publishing, Singapore (pp 309-16). (ISBN 978-981-4340-97-7)
Plagiarism Review Process and Ethics Committee Approval
Plagiarism Review Process
- Authors should submit the similarity report for their manuscript.
- Manuscripts with more than 25% similarity rate overall and more than 5% similarity rate with one source are not taken into the preliminary evaluation stage.
- Manuscripts with a similarity rate of 25% or less are checked based on the APA 6th edition referencing style.
Ethics Committee Approval
- All manuscripts that use data collected from human participants should submit ethichs comimittee approval form. These include research studies that require data collection by means of scale, questionnaire, interview, or observation.
- The researchers should acknowledge that ethical principles are taken into consideration during the data collection and analysis processes such as obtaining the volunteer informed / consent form in the article.