Social Security Journal

Ethical Principles of Article Publication

All individuals involved in the article process, including authors, editors, reviewers, executive managers, and subject editors of the Social Security Quarterly Journal, must be aware of and adhere to ethical principles regarding the publication of articles. These principles are defined according to ethical standards, and in cases of non-compliance, the journal reserves the right to take appropriate actions within its guidelines. Submission of an article by the author, as well as its review, signifies acknowledgment and agreement to adhere to these ethical principles. The ethical standards applied by the Social Security Quarterly Journal are based on the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the journal’s specific internal policies, updated accordingly. (The full COPE guidelines can be accessed at http://publicationethics.org.)

1. A) Ethical Writing Guidelines for Authors

1. Submitted articles must result directly from the author(s)' own studies, research, and findings. If other works or research findings are utilized, they must be properly, clearly, and fully cited. Failure to provide citations and any form of plagiarism, including the use of others' works without acknowledgment, copying, or paraphrasing others' texts in a slightly modified style, is unethical and unacceptable.
2. Articles submitted must not have been accepted or published in any domestic or international journals or conference proceedings. Additionally, they should not be under simultaneous submission elsewhere. Authors must refrain from submitting their articles to other journals until they receive a final decision from the Social Security Journal.
3. Authors should avoid submitting multiple articles simultaneously to the journal. The office will not process additional articles from the same author until a decision on the first submission is finalized.
4. Authors must refrain from submitting similar articles (those with minor differences in hypotheses, explanations, arguments, data, or results). If such submissions are identified, the journal will remove the article from its workflow and permanently ban future submissions from the authors.
5. When submitting an article for review, authors should not include their names, directly or indirectly (e.g., in footnotes or by citing their previous works as “by the current author”).
6. Authors must thoroughly review and adhere to the article submission process.
7. The corresponding author must be clearly identified, and the inclusion of co-authors’ names should be precise and relevant. The corresponding author must ensure all co-authors have provided written consent for submission and present this in a signed commitment letter to the editorial office.
8. The order and names of the authors in the initial submission are final. Any changes in the number or order of authors require rigorous justification and consent from all authors before publication, subject to strict journal review. Requests for such changes are unlikely to be approved.
9. Plagiarism is a serious offense and will not be tolerated. All submitted articles undergo checks for plagiarism to ensure originality.
10. If ethical violations are identified, the Social Security Journal will blacklist the authors, notify their affiliated institution/university, and reject any future submissions.
11. In cases of confirmed plagiarism or ethical breaches, the journal will remove the article from its workflow and permanently ban the authors’ future submissions. The journal follows COPE guidelines for handling such violations.
12. Authors must disclose all funding sources and sponsors for their research and publication.
13. In open-access journals, authors retain intellectual property rights to their articles while granting permission for others to download, print, and distribute the articles with proper acknowledgment and adherence to ethical publication principles.

1. B) Core Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

1. Reviewers should only accept articles for review within their area of expertise.
2. Differences in opinion should be respected during the review process. Articles should not be criticized solely because they present viewpoints contrary to the reviewer’s own scientific opinions.
3. Reviewers are committed to maintaining complete confidentiality regarding the research and findings of reviewed articles until they are officially published.
4. Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest or personal biases to the editor.
5. Reviewers should not consider the nationality, religion, ethnicity, culture, or economic background of the author(s) in their evaluations.
6. Reviewers must avoid derogatory or defamatory remarks about the author(s) in their feedback.
7. The review process should be conducted with utmost fairness and adherence to ethical and scientific standards.