Ethical Principles and Publication Policy


Principles of Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics can be defined as a self-regulatory mechanism that insists on integrity on behalf of authors, reviewers, and publishers to establish higher standards of editorial processing. Ethical standards for publication exist to ensure high-quality scientific publications, public confidence in scientific findings, and respect for people's opinions.

  • Honest researchers do not plagiarise.
  • They do not misattribute sources.
  • They do not hide objections they cannot refute.
  • They do not distort opposing views.
  • They do not destroy or hide data.

Peer-reviewed studies are studies that support and bring the scientific method to life. At this point, it is of great importance that all parties involved in the publication process (authors, readers, researchers, publishers, referees, and editors) comply with ethical principles. The IJPW journal adheres to national and international standards on research and publication ethics. It complies with the Press Law, the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works, and the Directive on Scientific Research and Publication Ethics of Higher Education Institutions. International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being (IJPW) has adopted the International Ethical Publishing Principles published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). It also undertakes to comply with the decisions of the Turkish Editors' Workshop.

Broadcast Replay

Republishing is the publication of the same article or substantially similar articles in more than one journal. The editor sends back such an article without reviewing it. The editor may then impose an embargo on the author who has attempted to republish for a certain period of time, publicise this situation in the journal in which the author has previously published (perhaps by simultaneous announcement with the editor of the journal that published the previous article), or apply all of these measures together.

Simultaneous submission of the same study to more than one journal

Authors may not submit the same article to more than one journal at the same time. If the editor learns of a possible simultaneous submission, he or she reserves the right to consult with the other editor(s) receiving the manuscript. In addition, the editor may return the manuscript without review, reject the manuscript without considering the reviews, or take this decision in discussion with the other editor(s) involved and decide not to accept submissions from authors for a certain period of time. It may also write to the authors' employers or take all of these measures together.

Control for the Prevention of Plagiarism

Plagiarism is presenting the ideas, methods, data, applications, writings, forms, or works of others as one's own work, in whole or in part, without citing their owners in accordance with scientific rules.

International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being scans all submitted articles to prevent plagiarism. The studies submitted for review are checked for plagiarism using Turnitin & Ithenticate software. The similarity rate is expected to be less than 20%. The main measure of similarity is the author's compliance with the rules of citation. If the similarity rate is 1% but citation and quotation are not done properly, plagiarism may still be in question. In this respect, citation and quotation rules should be known and carefully applied by the author. The journal is based on the APA 7 format (
Plagiarism, duplication, pseudo-authorship or denied authorship, research or data fabrication, article slicing, sliced publication, copyright infringement, and concealment of conflicts of interest are considered unethical behaviours. All articles that do not comply with accepted ethical standards are removed from publication. This includes articles containing possible irregularities and non-conformities detected after publication.

To produce data that is not based on research, to edit or change the work presented or published on the basis of unreal data, to report or publish them, or to show research that has not been done as if it has been done.
Falsifying research records and data obtained, showing methods, devices, and materials that were not used in the research as if they were used, not evaluating data that do not comply with the research hypothesis, manipulating data and/or results to fit the relevant theory or assumptions, or falsifying or shaping the results of the research in line with the interests of the persons and organisations supported

Protection of Participants' Personal Data

The International Journal of Positivity and Well-Being requires that all research involving personal or sensitive data or materials relating to human participants that is not legally publicly available be subject to a formal ethical review.

Addressing Allegations of Research Misconduct

The International Journal of Positivity and Well-Being adheres to COPE's Ethical Toolkit for a Successful Editorial. IJPW editors will take measures to prevent the publication of manuscripts in which plagiarism, citation manipulation, data falsification, data fabrication, and other research misconduct have occurred. In no case will IJPW editors knowingly allow such misconduct to occur. If the editors of the International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being are aware of any allegations of research misconduct related to an article published in their journal, they will follow COPE's guidelines regarding allegations.

 Ethical Violation Notices

If readers notice a significant error or inaccuracy in an article published in the International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being, or if they have any complaints about the editorial content (plagiarism, duplicate articles, etc.), they can send an e-mail to We welcome applications as they will provide an opportunity for us to improve, and we will respond quickly and constructively.

Correction, Withdrawal, Statement of Concern

Editors may consider publishing a correction if minor errors are detected in the published article that do not affect the findings, interpretations, or conclusions. Editors should consider retracting the manuscript if there are major errors or violations that invalidate the findings and conclusions. Editors should consider issuing a statement of concern if there is a possibility of research or publication misconduct by the authors; there is evidence that the findings are unreliable and that the authors' institutions have not investigated the incident; or the potential investigation appears unfair or inconclusive. COPE and ICJME guidelines regarding correction, retraction, or expression of concern are taken into account.

Publication of Studies Based on Surveys and Interviews

International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being adopts the "Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers" principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in order to provide ethical assurance in scientific periodical publishing. In this context, the following points should be complied with in the studies submitted to the journal:
1) For research in all disciplines that require ethics committee approval (which must be obtained), this approval must be stated and documented in the article.
2) In studies requiring ethics committee authorization, information about the authorization (name of the committee, date, and number) should be included in the method section and also on one of the first or last pages of the article; in case reports, information on the signature of the informed consent form should be included in the article.


Special Issue Publication Policy

A special issue can be published once a year upon the request of the Editorial Board. Articles submitted for inclusion in the special issue are first subjected to a preliminary editorial review. Then, they are examined for compliance with the journal's spelling rules, and similarity screening is performed to prevent plagiarism. After these stages, they are included in the peer review process, in which the double-blinded model will be used.

 Editorial Confidentiality

The editors of the International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents, which means that they will not disclose information about a manuscript to anyone without the authors' permission. During the manuscript review process, the following people have access to the manuscripts: Editors, Referees, Editorial Board Members. The only situation in which details about a manuscript may be passed to a third party without the authors' permission is if the editor suspects serious research misconduct.

Allegations-Suspicions of Scientific Misconduct

There are different definitions of scientific misconduct. We address these issues on a case-by-case basis, as the International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being follows guidance established by major publication ethics bodies. If the editor suspects or alleges an ethical violation, they are obliged to take action. This duty extends to both published and unpublished articles. The editor should not simply reject articles raising concerns about possible misconduct. He/she is ethically obliged to follow up on alleged cases. The editor should follow COPE flowcharts when appropriate. Editors should first seek a response from those suspected of misconduct. If they are not satisfied with the response, they should ask the relevant employer or organisation to investigate. The editor should make all reasonable endeavours to ensure that an appropriate investigation into the alleged misconduct is carried out; if this fails, the editor should make all reasonable attempts to insist on a resolution to the problem.

This is an arduous but important task.

The International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being follows COPE's Ethical Toolkit for a Successful Editorial. IJPW editors will take measures to prevent the publication of manuscripts in which plagiarism, citation manipulation, data falsification, data fabrication, and other research misconduct have occurred. In no case will IJPW or its editors knowingly allow such misconduct to occur. If IJPW editors become aware of any allegations of research misconduct related to an article published in their journal, they will follow COPE's guidelines regarding allegations.
Reviewers should inform the editor if they suspect research or publication misconduct. The editor is responsible for taking appropriate action in accordance with COPE recommendations.

IJPW is committed to applying the COPE flowcharts when faced with allegations of misconduct in the following or similar matters:

  • What to do if a re-broadcast is suspected
  • What to do when plagiarism is suspected
  • What to do if fabricated data is suspected
  • What to do when requesting a change of authorship
  • What to do if an undisclosed conflict of interest is suspected
  • What to do if unfair or gift authorship is suspected
  • What to do when an ethical problem is suspected in an article
  • What to do when the suspicion of ethical violation is directly notified by email, etc.
  • What to do when a suspected ethical violation is announced via social media

 Complaints Procedure

This procedure applies to complaints about content, procedures, or policies that are the responsibility of the International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being or our editorial staff. Complaints can provide an opportunity and incentive for improvement, and we aim to respond quickly, courteously, and constructively.
The complaint must relate to content, procedures, or policies that are the responsibility of the International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being or our editorial team. Complaints should be emailed directly to and will be treated confidentially. The editor responds to complaints promptly. The editor follows the procedure outlined in the COPE flowchart regarding complaints.

Complaints are reviewed by the relevant member of the editorial team, and if not resolved, the following processes are followed:

  • If this initial response is considered inadequate, the complainant may request that the complaint be forwarded to a more senior member of the journal.
  • If the complainant is not satisfied, the complaint may be forwarded to the editor-in-chief.
  • If possible, a full response will be given within two weeks.

COPE publishes a code of practice for editors of scientific journals. This should facilitate the resolution of disputes with editors, journals, and publishers, but only after the journal's own complaints procedures have been exhausted.

 Appeal Process

We welcome serious objections to the evaluations made by editors and reviewers. If you feel that we have rejected your manuscript because we misunderstood its scientific content, please send an appeal to our editorial team at Do not attempt to submit a revised version of your manuscript at this stage. If, after reading your appeal letter, we realise that your appeal is justified, we may invite you to submit a revised version of your manuscript. Your manuscript will then be resubmitted to the external review process. Please include as much detail as possible in the appeal letter. Finally, we can only consider one appeal per manuscript, so please take the time and effort to write the letter in detail to make your appeal clear -you have one chance, so use it well. We have found that prolonged deliberation over rejected papers is often unsatisfactory for both authors and editors, so we do not process multiple appeals for the same paper.

Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest arises when professional judgement about a primary interest may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain or personal competition). We believe that we need to know the authors' competing interests in order to make the best judgement about how to handle an article, and that readers should know them if we publish the article.
Any interest, financial or otherwise, that may cause one to be conflicted in one's work, significantly impair one's objectivity, or give an unfair advantage in favour of any person or organisation. All sources of financial support received during the conduct of the research and preparation of the manuscript, as well as 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, and grants. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

IJPW has a set process for handling submissions from editors, staff, or editorial board members to ensure an unbiased review. Such submissions are first referred to other journals. If this is not possible, the author of the submission will be suspended from the journal. These submissions are reviewed in a double-blind process.
The editor should not be involved in decisions about manuscripts written by himself or herself or family members. Furthermore, such a paper should be subject to all the usual procedures of the journal. The editor should follow the ICMJE guidelines on disclosure of potential conflicts of interest by authors and reviewers.


Principles of Research Ethics

The International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being observes the highest standards in research ethics and adopts the international research ethics principles defined below. It is the responsibility of the authors to ensure that the articles comply with the ethical rules.

  • The principles of integrity, quality, and transparency must be ensured in the design, review of the design, and conduct of the research.
  • The research team and participants should be fully informed about the purpose of the research, its methods and possible uses, and the requirements and risks, if any, of participation in the research.
  • It is important to guarantee both the confidentiality of the respondents' responses and the confidentiality of the research participants' information. The research should be designed to protect the autonomy and dignity of the participants.
  • Research participants should take part in the research voluntarily and should not be under any coercion.
  • Harm to the participants should be avoided. The research should be planned in a way that does not put the participants at risk.
  • Research independence should be clear and explicit; if there is a conflict of interest, it should be stated.
  • In experimental studies with human subjects, the written informed consent of the participants who decide to participate in the research must be obtained. The consent of the legal guardian of children, those under guardianship, or those with a certified mental illness must be obtained.
  • If the study will be carried out in any institution or organisation, approval must be obtained from the institution or organisation where the study will be carried out.
  • In studies with a human element, it should be stated in the "method" section that "informed consent" has been obtained from the participants and ethics committee approval has been obtained from the institution where the study is conducted.


The journal adheres to the ethical standards outlined in the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the International Standards for editors and writers issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Peer-reviewed articles serve as a foundation for the scientific method and exemplify its principles. Hence, it is crucial to establish a consensus over the norms and principles that define anticipated ethical conduct. The website of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) provides a comprehensive set of ethical rules for peer reviewers and addresses various other topics. It is recommended that you familiarise yourself with the COPE criteria before submitting your work (see for more information).

Authors are required to adhere to the established ethical norms that are widely acknowledged within the academic community. Hence, it is incumbent upon all parties involved to uphold the ideals of ethical standards. Every manuscript submitted to the International Journal of Professional Writing (IJPW) undergoes an initial plagiarism check. iThenticate /Turnitin is utilised to conduct plagiarism checks on all submitted materials. The authors are required to affirm that the manuscript has been exclusively submitted to this journal and has not been published, is not in press, or has been submitted to any other publication. It is advisable for the authors to include a written certification affirming that the article has not been previously submitted to any other journal or publisher for the purpose of publication. The evaluation of submitted papers is conducted with consideration of their originality, scientific and technical excellence, potential influence, and clarity of exposition.

The journal's article evaluation process abides by the standards of peer review and double-blind review. The reviewers are unable to establish direct communication with the writers, and instead, their evaluations and comments are transmitted to the authors via the journal's system.

 Authors are required to submit original articles to the journal. All citations from other sources must be clear.

  • The inclusion of persons who do not contribute to the study should be avoided when listing names. In the event that a conflict of interest arises in relation to the study, it is imperative to adhere to the established Conflict of Interest protocol.
  • All submitted works undergo plagiarism checks using Turnitin or iThenticate. Authors may be requested to revise their papers, or manuscripts may be excluded from the publication process. The authors bear full responsibility for any instances of plagiarism found within their articles.
  • During the manuscript review process, it is common for the author(s) to be requested to provide the raw data. In the event of such a scenario, it is imperative for the author(s) to be prepared to duly provide the aforementioned data and information to the editorial and scientific boards.
  • The authors should ensure that they have obtained informed consent from the participants and have obtained the required permits pertaining to the sharing and research/analysis of the data utilised in their study. In order to conduct research involving human subjects, it is imperative for authors to secure approval from their institutional ethics committee and ensure adherence to established guidelines, such as the Declaration of Helsinki. The World Medical Association (WMA), in the Declaration of Helsinki, outlines ethical guidelines for medical research involving human subjects with the intention of minimising potential harm to participants. 
  • The journal asks you to follow the general principles and human relations guidance in APA 7. Please pay special attention to the section on avoiding harm. For empirical research with human or animal study participants, be sure to submit your research protocol for ethical approval prior to conducting your research.