top of page

Ethical principles and editorial policy


The editors of mediarts are responsible for the smooth publication or rejection and return of each submitted work, and may decide whether a work is sent to the referee or rejected without sending it to the referee. Editors may consult with editorial board and advisory board members on decisions to be taken regarding the publication process.


Editors and referees consider the studies submitted to the journal for publication according to academic values ​​and criteria and accept or reject them. In this process, each text is handled impartially, and the texts are evaluated with academic criteria, regardless of race, religion, language, ethnicity, gender, political or any other opinion, property, seniority, title, institutional relations or any other discrimination. In situations that may involve conflict of interest, the author, referee and editor are responsible to each other. In the articles sent to the journal, if one of the components (author, referee or editor) involved in the publication process is in a competition of interest that may negatively affect the publication process (article submission, evaluation, editorial decisions; communication between the author, referee and editors), this interest conflict has to be stated.


The magazine does not give any guarantees and accepts responsibility for the characteristics and explanations of the commercial products in the article published in the journal for advertising purposes. If the article has a direct or indirect business link or financial support institution for the study, the authors must declare this link and declare that there is no commercial relationship between them.


The editorial board and advisory board members, except for the editor and assistant editors, are not aware of the identity of the author. These people do not give information about the articles to third parties. However, if necessary, the editorial board members may be informed by the editor.

The journal is protected in terms of intellectual property rights. The readers of the journal can share the journal material provided that they give reference; copy and redistribute in any medium and format. However , materials of mediarts cannot be used for commercial purposes or subject to legal or technological measures limiting the right of disposal of other rights holders to the extent permitted by the license.


If a previously published quote, text, table, picture, etc. in the article. If available, the article author must obtain written permission from the copyright holder and authors and indicate this in the article. The author (s) are responsible for whether the necessary permissions have been obtained.


The authors are responsible for the compliance of the articles with scientific and ethical rules.




Referee evaluation process


mediarts uses “two-sided/double blind review” method in which the identities of the author and the referee are hidden (the author and the referee do not see and know each other's names) during the evaluation process of all the articles that are evaluated by the referee.


The editor clearly states that the articles submitted to the referees for review are the private property of the authors and that this is a privileged communication. Referees and editorial board members cannot discuss articles open to the public. Referees may not make copies of articles for personal use and cannot hand over articles without the permission of the editor. Reviews of referees cannot be published or disclosed without the permission of the author and editor. Care should be taken to keep the identity of the referees anonymous. In some cases, with the decision of the editor, the relevant referees' comments on the article can be sent to other referees who interpret the same article and the referees can be enlightened in this process.


Each submitted article is primarily evaluated by the editor (s). At this stage, studies that do not fall within the scope and purpose of the journal, are not considered sufficient in terms of language and expression rules in Turkish, English, German and French, contain scientifically critical information errors, do not have original value and do not meet the journal's publication policies are rejected by the editor. Rejected manuscripts (with minor changes or simply renaming) cannot be sent back to mediarts. Before sending an article to the referee, the editor can make suggestions to the author and request a correction. Studies found appropriate are sent to two referees who are experts in their fields for evaluation. Referees make their evaluations on the form sent to them via DergiPark. Articles that receive a negative evaluation from one of the two referees are sent to a third referee. The article that receives positive approval from 2 of the 3 referees is published, if it is negative, the article is considered rejected and removed from the publishing process. Referees are required to evaluate the manuscripts sent to them within 15 days. Referees can examine the revisions of a work and decide whether it is appropriate or, if necessary, request corrections more than once. While the articles are sent to the referees, their expertise and interests are taken into consideration, so the title of the author of the article and the hierarchy created by this title are not important in terms of journal publishing policy.


mediarts is aware of its responsibility in accordance with the international ethical rules to ensure that all articles submitted to the journal are completed in an independent and impartial manner. If there is any conflict of interest between the author and the referees related to the application or evaluation of an article, this should be reported to the editor.


Plagiarism control is made through software for the articles sent to the journal. By examining the matches created by the software of each study in depth, the matches with the correct reference and citation are extracted. As a result of the sorting, the remaining matches are examined, errors are detected and reported to the editorial board. The editorial board makes its final decision about the study in the light of the plagiarism audit report of each study. The authors may be asked to correct the errors in the report or the study can be returned to the authors.




Open access policy

All content published by mediarts can be accessed free of charge in accordance with BOAI policies. Accordingly, it does not observe any pricing policy for article submission, evaluation, publication and access processes, and provides all these services free of charge. Therefore, no fee is charged to the author or his/her institution under any name.




Ethical rules and responsibilities


mediarts Institutions of Higher Education Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive as well as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), published by the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors with COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors on the basis of fulfilling ethical responsibilities and duties undertakes; expects writers and referees to act in this framework.




Authors' ethical responsibilities


Author (s) who submit work to mediarts are expected to comply with the following ethical responsibilities:

■ It is expected that the works submitted by the author (s) will be original. If the author (s) benefit from or use other studies, they must cite and / or quote completely and accurately.

■ People who do not contribute to the content intellectually in the creation of the study should not be specified as authors.

■ The situations and relationships of all studies submitted for publication that may constitute a conflict of interest, if any, should be disclosed.

■ The author (s) may request raw data regarding their articles within the framework of evaluation processes, in such a case, the author (s) should be ready to present the expected data and information to the editorial board and advisory board.

■ The author (s) must have the right to use the data used, the necessary permissions for research / analysis, or are obliged to ensure the protection of human and animal rights in their work. The ethics committee approval for the subjects used in the studies is deemed to have accepted that the study may be rejected in the absence of permissions for experimental research.

■ In the event that the author (s) notices a mistake or error in their published work, at the early view or evaluation stage, the journal editor or publisher has an obligation to cooperate with the editor in informing, correcting or withdrawing.

■ Authors cannot have their work in the application process of more than one journal at the same time. Each application can be started following completion of the previous application. Another study published in the journal mediarts' to not be sent.

■ Change of author responsibilities (such as adding authors, changing the order of authors, removing authors) cannot be proposed for a study whose evaluation process has started.

■ Studies that have been presented as a paper but not published, as well as from postgraduate theses at events with academic qualities such as meetings, symposiums or congresses, are accepted for evaluation provided that they are prepared in accordance with the basic format of the scientific research.




Ethical responsibilities of referees

The evaluation process of all articles that apply to mediarts carried out by "two-sided/double blind review" method. Referees cannot contact the authors directly, evaluations and comments are submitted through the journal management system. In this process, referee comments on evaluation forms and full texts are sent to the author (s) through the editor. In this context, it is expected that referees evaluating a study for mediarts have the following ethical responsibilities:

■ Agree to evaluate only articles related to their field of expertise.

■ It should evaluate in impartiality and confidentiality.

■ If he / she thinks that he / she faces a conflict of interest during the evaluation process, he / she should not accept to review the study and inform the editor of the journal.

■ Due to the confidentiality principle, they should destroy the studies they examine after the evaluation process. They can only use the final versions of the studies they have reviewed, only after they have been published.

■ Make the assessment objectively only in relation to the content of the study. It should not allow nationality, gender, religious beliefs, political beliefs, and business concerns to influence the assessment.

■ The assessment should be made in a constructive and courteous language. He should not make derogatory personal comments that contain hostility, slander and insult.

■ They must perform the work they have accepted to evaluate, in a timely manner and with the above ethical responsibilities.

■ If deemed necessary, they can exchange views with the editor during the evaluation process.




Editors' duties and ethical responsibilities


mediarts editors and assistants have the following ethical duties and responsibilities on the basis of the "COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).


Editors are responsible for every publication posted on mediarts. In the context of this responsibility, editors bear the following obligations:

■ It should make an effort to meet the information needs of readers and authors, in this context, it is obliged to carefully examine the complaints from the authors, referees or readers and respond in an enlightening and descriptive manner.

■ Continuous improvement of the journal,

■ Conducting the processes to improve the quality of the studies published in the journal,

■ Supporting freedom of thought,

■ Ensuring academic integrity,

■ Continuing business processes without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards,

■ To show clarity and transparency in terms of publication in matters requiring correction, explanation, informing the editorial board when necessary,

■ Editors; is obliged to apply the "bilateral blind refereeing" method in the journal publishing policy. In this context, editors ensure that each work is completed in a fair, impartial and timely evaluation process.




Editor and author relations


■ Editors should make positive or negative decisions based on the importance, original value, validity, clarity of expression, and the journal's goals and objectives.

■ Unless the studies that are suitable for the scope of the publication do not have serious problems, they should be included in the pre-evaluation stage.

■ Editors should not ignore positive referee suggestions unless there is a serious problem with the work.

■ New editors should not change the decisions made by the previous editor (s) regarding the work, unless there is a serious problem.

■ An explanatory and informative notification and feedback should be provided to the authors.

■ Editor is responsible for protecting the individual data of the author, referee and readers.

■ The editor should take into account the persuasive criticisms of the works published in the journal and display a constructive attitude towards these criticisms. It should give the author (s) the right to reply to the criticized studies.

■ The editorial process continues until the publication of the manuscript. Apart from the referees' suggestions for correction, the editor may request corrections from the authors until the last stage.



Editor and referee relations


Editors' duties and responsibilities towards referees are as follows:

■ The referees should determine in accordance with the subject of the study.

■ It is obliged to provide the information and guides that referees will need during the evaluation phase.

■ It has to observe whether there is a conflict of interest between the authors and referees.

■ In the context of blind refereeing, the identity of the referees must be kept confidential.

■ Encourage referees to consider working in an impartial, scientific and objective language.

■ He should evaluate the referees with criteria such as timely return and performance.

■ It should determine practices and policies that improve the performance of referees.

■ Take the necessary steps to dynamically update the referee pool.

■ Avoid impolite and unscientific evaluations.

■ Take steps to ensure that the referee pool is made up of a broad spectrum.

■ It should ensure that the judgments in the studies that contain errors, inconsistencies or misdirections are corrected quickly.




Editor and editorial board relations


Editors should inform editorial board members about editorial policies and keep them informed of developments. The new editorial board should educate its members on editorial policies and provide the information they need.


In addition, the editors;

■ Editorial board members should ensure that they evaluate the work impartially and independently.

■ Identify new editorial board members who are able to contribute and are appropriate.

■ The editorial board should send the works appropriate to the specialization of the members for evaluation.

■ Be in regular interaction with the editorial board.

■ It should organize meetings with the editorial board at regular intervals for the development of publishing policies and the journal.

■ Special issue and file issues are determined by the editors.

bottom of page