1. Ethical Responsibilities of Author(s)

• It is the author’s responsibility to ensure that the submitted manuscript is original and research-based in accordance with the specified academic fields.
• The manuscript should not be submitted to different journals/platforms simultaneously and must not have been previously published elsewhere.
• Including individuals who have no academic contribution as authors, or ranking authors based on non-scientific criteria such as title, age, and gender without considering the order of contribution, is contrary to scientific ethics. Proposals to change the author order, remove authors, or add authors for a manuscript applied for publication should not be made. All authors must consent to the publication of a study.
• The author(s) are obliged to provide the raw data of the manuscript to the editor if requested by the journal editors.
• Authors submitting manuscripts to the journal are assumed to have read and accepted the journal’s publication and writing principles and are deemed to have committed to what is expected of them in these principles.
• Cited sources must be specified in the references, and the reference list must be prepared completely and accurately.
• Author(s) must contact the editor to inform them, correct their manuscript, or withdraw it if they notice an error regarding their manuscripts in the evaluation, early view stages, or published electronically.
• The author(s) should take into account the Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive as specified by the Council of Higher Education.

2. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Reviewers should evaluate the manuscript with the responsibility of increasing academic quality.
• Reviewers should only accept the review of manuscripts for which they have the necessary expertise to make an appropriate evaluation, can comply with double-blind review confidentiality, and can keep the details of the manuscript confidential in every way.
• Any information regarding the reviewed manuscript should not be shared with others in any way during and after the review process.
• Reviewers should only evaluate the accuracy of the manuscript’s content and its compliance with academic criteria. The fact that the ideas put forward in the manuscript differ from the reviewer’s ideas should not affect the evaluation.
• Reviewer reports must be objective and moderate. Insulting, belittling, and accusing expressions should be strictly avoided.
• Reviewers should avoid superficial and vague statements in their evaluation reports. In evaluations with negative results, the missing and deficient points on which the result is based should be demonstrated concretely.
• Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts within the time allotted to them. If they are not going to perform an evaluation, they should notify the journal within a reasonable period.

3. Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

• Editors should accept manuscripts for the evaluation process that will contribute to the relevant fields specified in the journal policy.
• Editors should not be in any conflict of interest/relationship with the accepted or rejected manuscripts and their authors.
• Editors have all the responsibility and authority to accept or reject a manuscript.
• It is the responsibility of the editors to keep the names of the reviewers and authors mutually confidential.
• Editors should make the necessary efforts for the plagiarism screening of manuscripts submitted for publication.
• It is the duty of the editors to ensure that the preliminary review, peer review, editing, and publishing processes of the manuscripts submitted to the journal are completed in a timely and healthy manner.
• Editors should prioritize academic concerns and criteria when accepting manuscripts for the journal.

4. Ethical Responsibilities of the Editorial Board

• The Cedid Editorial Board is responsible for determining, developing, and implementing the general publication policies of the journal.
• The decisions of the editorial board are taken independently of publishers and external pressures.
• The main principle is to increase the scientific quality of the journal, encourage qualified publications, and protect originality and ethical standards.
• The protection of copyrights, intellectual property regulations, plagiarism measures, and the healthy functioning of scientific audit processes are under the responsibility of the editorial board.

Reporting Ethical Violations

In case of noticing a situation contrary to scientific ethics (plagiarism, unfair authorship, conflict of interest, lack of ethics committee approval, etc.), relevant persons or institutions are requested to communicate directly with the journal editorship (editor@cediddergi.com). When any information regarding this matter reaches the editor, the reports are meticulously examined and necessary procedures are initiated.

Cedid is a scientific, peer-reviewed, and open-access journal that includes original studies prepared in the field of modern Turkish literature. The publication languages of the journal, which is published twice a year in June and December, are Turkish and English. Our journal adopts the highest standards in publication ethics and adheres to national and international principles such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and the Higher Education Council Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive.

• Submitted studies must be original and must not have been previously published elsewhere or submitted for publication.
• The study must be presented with the written approval of all authors, and removing or adding author names or changing the author order after submission should only be done with the written permission of all authors.
• Papers previously presented at a scientific meeting may be considered for evaluation, provided that this situation is explicitly stated.
• The legal and academic responsibility for the views and findings expressed in the studies belongs to the authors.
• Every manuscript applied for is subject to a preliminary evaluation by the editorial board in terms of form and content. Manuscripts that do not comply with the writing principles are rejected without being taken into the reviewer process.
• Manuscripts deemed appropriate are evaluated by at least two independent and expert reviewers using a double-blind peer review system.
• When one of the reviewers gives a positive opinion and the other gives a negative opinion, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer by the editor’s decision. Studies with two or more negative reports are not published and are returned to the author.
• The final publication decision belongs to the editorial board.
• Editors ensure that the reviewer process is conducted in a fair, impartial, and transparent manner.