The Journal of Nuclear Sciences (JNS) is an open access and cost-free peer-reviewed international scientific journal acting in the field of nuclear sciences. The Journal of Nuclear Sciences (JNS) adheres to the publication ethics principles, standards, and recommendations based on the guides by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The guides are "COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" available from open Access by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Accordingly, manuscripts that do not comply with ethical standards are not accepted. Within the scope of publication ethics, all stakeholders (authors, reviewers, and editors) are expected to have the following ethical responsibilities:
(*: Editors include Chief-Editor and Section Editors)
• Editors actively deal with the views of authors, readers, reviewers and editorial board members about ways of improving their journal’s processes.
• Editors should screen the manuscript through a similarity software such as iThenticate before it was sent to the reviewers.
• Editors should enable to ensure that peer review at the journal is fair, unbiased and timely.
• The editor and the section editors should have assigned at least two external and independent reviewers by ensuring that they are reviewed by suitably qualified reviewers.
• Editors should provide guidance to reviewers on everything that is expected of them including the need to handle submitted material in confidence.
• Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the remit of the journal.
• Editors have a duty to act if they suspect misconduct or if an allegation of misconduct is brought to them. This duty extends to both published and unpublished papers.
• Editors should not simply reject papers that raise concerns about possible misconduct. Editors decide by following the relevant COPE flowcharts in cases that do not comply with publication ethics issues (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts).
• Reviewers should adhere only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner.
• Reviewers respond in a reasonable time-frame, especially if they cannot do the review, and without intentional delay.
• Reviewers respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal.
• Reviewers do not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others and does not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality.
• Reviewers should be objective and constructive in their reviews, avoiding from being hostile or inflammatory and they also should refrain from making libelous or derogatory personal comments by acknowledging that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavor. Reviewers should also be fair and academic independence in his/her evaluation.
• Reviewers ensure their comments and recommendations for the editor are consistent with their report for the authors and most feedback should be put in the report for the authors.
• Reviewers' confidential comments to the editor should not be a place for denigration or false accusation, done in the knowledge that the authors will not see these comments.
• Author(s) must submit original studies that do not contain fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. Manuscripts that have plagiarism and other unethical situations are not acceptable.
• Author(s) should not submit the same manuscript more than one journal. This unethical behaviour is unacceptable by the journal. Also, a study previously published in another journal cannot be submitted to Journal of Nuclear Sciences (JNS). In such a situation, COPE flowcharts are applied.
• Authors are obliged to submit their manuscript, taking into account the recommendations in the "Author Guidelines" section of the Journal of Nuclear Sciences(JNS).
• Author(s) should describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can be confirmed by others. Appropriate citations should be made in the manuscript and all references should be given incomplete.
• Author(s) who do not contribute significantly to the study should not be included in the manuscript as a co-author.
• If there are conflicts of interest or relationships between authors, these should be clearly stated.
• Author(s) undertake the responsibility to inform the editor of the journal if they notice a mistake in their manuscript during the publication process and to cooperate with the editors during the correction or withdrawal process.
Handling of Complaints and Appeals
Complaints and Appeals are received by the Technical Editor. The Chief-In-Editor is informed subsequently. Complaints are inspected and appropriate Section Editors are assigned within the Editorial Board and related complaints and objections are informed. The final solution of the problems is controlled by the Editor. Lastly, the complainant is informed about the subject by the Editor and/or the technical Editor.
Data sharing and Reproducibility
The Journal of Nuclear Sciences (JNS) has been published both online and in hard copy. The online version is provided by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) Dergipark Ulakbim for open-access. ULAKBIM Dergipark service provides benefits in many areas such as creating transparency in science by sharing research data, enhancing the relationship between researchers, increasing the number of citations of published articles, and reproducibility of data. In addition, the records of the journal data are kept by the Ankara University Library Directorate Archive unit, apart from the ULAKBIM service (https://dspace.ankara.edu.tr/xmlui/handle/20.500.12575/39762). Thus, researchers can easily access previous articles, which encourages reproducibility.
Post-publication discussions and Corrections
Post-publishing discussions and Corrections is implemented the principles and procedures specified in compliance with the COPE principles and realizes the withdrawal cases. Apart from this, our journal evaluates possible solutions by contacting the ULAKBIM journal platform in order to correct the articles in cases that do not require retraction. In addition, for discussions and comments on published data, an e-mail may be sent to the editor to evaluate for the relevant publication.