Ethical Guidelines for Publishing Academic Works in Journals

The Journal of Health Promotion, Human Performance, and Innovation serves as a medium for disseminating research and academic articles between authors and readers. Therefore, to ensure accurate and transparent academic communication, guidelines for best practices and ethical conduct in publishing research or academic works have been established according to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). These guidelines are broken down by the roles of those involved as follows:

Duties of Authors

Submitted articles must be original, never before published elsewhere, or not currently under consideration for publication in another journal. There must be no plagiarism, either of oneself or others, and all authors listed in the original article must have actually contributed to the research. The corresponding author must certify this in the cover letter.
In the case of research articles, a copy of the certification from the Human Research Ethics Committee of the data collection agency, university, or relevant organization must be attached, and the facts of the research must be reported without concealment, false information, or misleading statements.
Prepare the manuscript accurately as specified in the Authors' Guidelines.
Revise the manuscript completely according to the feedback from the reviewers and editorial board, and submit the revised manuscript to the editorial board within the specified timeframe. Notify the editor if you need to postpone the submission deadline or cancel the submission. Failure to comply with these duties may affect the publication of the work or the editor's decision.
Cite all relevant academic works used in your work completely, both in-text (in-text citations) and in the reference list, using the 6th edition of the American Psychological Association (APA) citation style, as exemplified in the Authors' Guidelines.
Pay the publication fee before the manuscript enters the peer review process. Authors will not receive a refund regardless of whether the review results in acceptance or rejection.

Duties of Editors:

Screen submitted articles to ensure they meet the journal's objectives and scope. Evaluate the quality of the articles according to academic principles, using the article evaluation form and Authors' Guidelines as guidelines.
Select reviewers who have expertise in the field of the article and belong to a different affiliation than the author. The article review process is conducted anonymously, with both parties unaware of each other's identities.
The identities of authors and reviewers are not disclosed to unrelated individuals during the review process.
The quality of the article is determined after the review process based on academic accuracy, relevance and timeliness of the topic, revisions made according to reviewer recommendations, clarity of communication, and scientific writing style.
Articles are rigorously checked for plagiarism, both of one's own and others'. If such plagiarism is found, the review process must be stopped immediately, and the author contacted for revisions or clarification to aid in the decision-making process regarding acceptance or rejection of publication.
The decision of the previous editor is not overturned unless a serious problem is proven.
There are no conflicts of interest with authors, reviewers, or institutional administrators.
Information regarding the article review process is provided, and explanations are available if any deviations from the stated review process are encountered. Guidelines for authors are published, covering all relevant information, and kept regularly updated.
All necessary measures are taken to ensure the quality of submitted articles.

Duties of Reviewers:

Reviewers must not disclose information about submitted articles to unrelated individuals during the review process.
They must avoid conflicts of interest with the submitted article. If a conflict of interest is found, the reviewer must inform the editor and decline the review.
Review articles within their area of ​​expertise, considering the quality of the article based on the criteria outlined in the review form and author guidelines, using academic principles and empirical data, not personal opinions.
Inform the editor if the content of an article duplicates other work.
Provide feedback to the author if there is significant research relevant to the article being reviewed that the author has not yet cited.
Submit the review results within the specified timeframe, or inform the editor if a deadline needs to be extended.