Journal of Humanities Insights belongs to the scientific community and we are accomplishing the standards of Publishing Ethics in our journal. We persuade high quality and standards in scientific publishing. We are intended to preserve the principle of peer review process and will increase the completeness of scientific research. Editors of Journal of Humanities Insights will review all manuscripts. The average time between submission and final decision is about 40 days and the average time between acceptance and publication is about 30 days. This journal is under Open Access Policies.
Journal of Humanities Insights has a sophisticated editorial board whose members are experts in the research areas which are along with the journal’s scope. The full names and affiliations of the journal’s editors can be seen on the journal’s website.
EDITOR ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Editors of Journal of Humanities Insights are responsible for the contents provided by authors, the comments made by peer reviewers regarding appropriateness of manuscripts, the journal’s readers and the scientific community, the publishers of the journals, and the public.
EDITORIAL BOARD PARTICIPATION
The editor-in-chief should determine the responsibility that editors and editorial board have and assign them to perform their tasks. The editor-in-chief or principal editor should guarantee that the journal’s editors and editorial board are received essential training and have control over the functions the editorial perform, such as assigning reviewing manuscripts and giving advice on the journal policy.
The Journal of Humanities Insights gives the editors complete freedom, which claims that editors-in-Chief have full control over the whole content of the selected articles, which will be published in Journal of Humanities Insights.
Some of the advantages are as follows:
Editors-in-Chief owners have the authority of evaluation, selection, scheduling, or editing of individual articles either directly or by creating an environment that strongly affects making decisions.
Editors should make a decision according to the validity of manuscript and its significance to the journal’s readers, not on the commercial implications for the journal.
Editors-in-chief should take the responsibility for founding an autonomous editorial advisory board in order to support the editors in following editorial policy.
Editors should search for input, if necessary, from a wide range of advisers such as reviewers, editorial staff, an editorial board, and readers to help editorial decisions and potentially controversial expressions of opinion.
In case of facing legal problems, the editor should consult with their legal adviser and their owner and/or publisher to resolve the problems.
Editors should protect the confidentiality of authors and peer-reviewers (names and reviewer comments) based on Journal of Humanities Insights policy.
The editor should have access to the highest level of ownership, not to an appointed manager or administrative officer to guarantee editorial freedom in practice,
Manuscripts submitted to Journal of Humanities Insights are authors’ private, intimate property, and if the manuscript’s details disclose prematurely, the authors will be harmed. Therefore, the editors are responsible for the manuscripts submitted by the authors and they should not share their information such as the received manuscripts, the under review papers, their content and status in the review process, criticism by reviewers and their final fate.
There are several policies towards confidentiality in Journal of Humanities Insights as follows:
Editors should be confidant about a submitted manuscript and they can share the information with those who are taking part in the evaluation, review, and publication processes.
Editors have responsibility for adding a confidentiality notification to all communications such as reviewer forms, to serve as a reminder to authors, editors, and reviewers.
Journal of Humanities Insights should provide a mechanism including safely storing or archiving papers and electronic manuscript and related content.
Archives and schedules, such as how long to keep published manuscripts and associated communications or rejected manuscripts and related correspondence, should be recorded in writing and reviewed regularly.
The editors do not have the right to use confidential information for their own purposes, and they should take measures to make sure that this information is not used to benefit others.
If those involved in the peer-review process violate the confidentiality, the editors should be in touch with the involved parties in order to resolve the problems.
In cases of breach of confidentiality by those involved in the peer-review process, editors should contact the involved parties and follow up on such cases until they are satisfactorily resolved.
Any requests from third parties base on using manuscripts and reviews for lawful proceedings should be politely rejected, and editors should make efforts not to disclose these confidential materials.
Editors do not have the right to publish the peer reviewers’ comments without getting permission from the reviewer and the authors.
If dishonesty or fraud is claimed, Confidentiality may be violated, but editors should inform the authors or the reviewers if they want to do so and confidentiality must otherwise be privileged.
TIMELINESS OF THE PUBLICATION PROCESS
The Editor-in-Chief of Journal of Humanities Insights guarantees timely processing of manuscripts with the resources available with them.
The Editor-in-Chief of Journal of Humanities Insights should make effort to refuse the manuscript as soon as possible to allow authors to submit their manuscript to another journal.
Journal of Humanities Insights hard copy and electronic journals are published on time. Electronic issues are published online in a timely manner as frequently as specified at the same time of hard copy publication. Timeliness is vital for electronic journals, or e-journals and printed journals. If the e-journals are publishing different issues at a specified frequency, these issues should appear online in a timely manner and printed journals are published or sent to the authorities who search for the hard copy. Editors have the responsibility for monitoring the turnaround time for every publishing stage from manuscript receiving to publication or refusal. Processing data and assessing trends can assist editors in examining acceptance and rejection rates of specific types of manuscripts, manage the inventory/backlog of accepted manuscripts, follow reviewers’ and editors’ achievement, and evaluate staffing needs. In this way, Journal of Humanities Insights has an ability to publish on time implies a healthy supporter of manuscripts vital for continuous sustainability.
Decisions made by editorial boards should be according to the relation of a manuscript to the journal and the manuscript’s innovation, quality, and contribution to evidence about important questions. Those decisions should not be affected by commercial benefits, personal relationships or schedules, or results that are negative or that believably challenge accepted wisdom.
The Journal of Humanities Insights has very strict ethical policy, that is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) instructions and in accordance with International Committee of Journal of Humanities Insights Editorial Board rules of conduct. Readers, authors, reviewers and editors should pursue these ethical policies when working with Journal of Humanities Insights (http://www.jhumanities.net/journal/process?ethics).
Journal of Humanities Insights is a double blind peer reviewed electronic and print quarterly publication regarding all aspects of Humanities and Social Science. Journal of Humanities Insights publishes original research papers, review papers, case reports, short communications, letters to editor and authors’ response about letters to editor across the extensive field of Humanities and Social Science. The publication employ peer review process in order to quality control by qualified specialists is covered by the database. The Editorial Board will select publications which are of high quality in content, and if possible researchers’ works are not with the aim of making profit.
As well as rapid Peer Review Process, the Journal of Humanities Insights has Post-Publication Evaluation by the scientific community. Post-Publication Evaluation is focused to make sure that the quality of published research, review and case report reaches certain standards and the conclusions that are presented and justified.
RESPONSIBILITY OF PEER-REVIEW PROCESS
Articles submitted to the Journal of Humanities Insights are permitted via peer-review process under various levels, as follows:
Authors: Authors should obey all rules of authorship.
Editors: The editors should obey all rules of Confidentiality, Timeliness, Peer Review and Integrity.
Reviewers: Manuscripts submitted to journals are honored correspondence that are authors’ private, confidential property, and authors may be harmed by early revelation of any or all of a manuscript’s details. Hence, reviewers should obey all rules of Responsibilities of Reviewers.
All participating authors should be eligible for authorship. The co-authors should decide on the order of the authorship. Adequate contribution in the work is of great significance.
Journal of Humanities Insights should clarify the type of copyright under which authors’ manuscripts will be published. Upon accepting the manuscript, authors should fill in a Journal Publishing Agreement’.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Journal of Humanities Insights ask the authors to clarify whether impending conflicts do or do not exist while submitting their articles via Conflict of Interest Disclosure form.
NEED OF CORRECTIONS
When an author(s) finds out a considerable error or inaccuracy in his/her own published manuscript, it is the author’s responsibility to inform the journal editor or publisher immediately to correct the mistake in the manuscript. If a correction is needed, journals should pursue these minimum standards:
– Journal of Humanities Insights is responsible for publishing a correction notification as soon as possible specifying changes from the original article.
– Journal of Humanities Insights should publish a new version of article including details to specify the changes from the original version.
– The electronic versions should conspicuously cite that there are new versions of the article.
– The citation should be according to the most recent version.
Manuscripts that have been refused do not qualify for further consideration by the Journal of Humanities Insights; therefore, rejected manuscript should not be submitted again. Any revision which is allowed should be expressly specified in the editor’s decision. Other revisions of former rejected manuscripts will be quickly returned to the authors without review.
There are four kinds of overlapping publications such as Duplicate submission, Duplicate publication, Acceptable secondary publication and manuscript based on the same database.
Duplicate submission: The probability that two or more journals will unintentionally assume the work of peer review, edit the same manuscript, and publish the same article. Therefore, authors should avoid submitting the same manuscript, in the same or different languages to more than one journal concurrently.
Duplicate publication occurs when a paper publishes overlapping considerably with another published paper and there is no clear reference to the former article. Duplicate publication can cause problems since it can lead to unintentional double-counting of data or unsuitable weighting of the results of a single study.
Duplicate publication of original research is particularly problematic because it can result in inadvertent double-counting of data or inappropriate weighting of the results of a single study, distorting the available evidence.
Manuscript based on the same database: If the authors send their manuscripts which are as a result of different research groups or of the same group which analyses the same data set for instance, from a public database, or organized reviews or meta-analyses of the same evidence, the manuscripts should be considered autonomously since they may vary in their analytic approaches, conclusions or both.
It seems logical that editors can prioritize the manuscript which had been sent earlier if they receive the same data interpretation and conclusions.
Editors might decide on publishing more than one manuscript that overlap with each other since different analytical methods may be supplementary and equally reliable, but manuscripts which are based on the same dataset should add to each other to guarantee consideration for publication as separate papers, with appropriate citation of previous publications from the same dataset to give permission for transparency.
Acceptable secondary publication: Secondary publication of material which was published in other journals or online may be defensible and advantageous, especially when planned to publish important information to a wide variety of audiences.
PROTECTING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
the main responsibility of the reviewer and the editor is supporting intellectual property. Hence, Reviewers, will not have the right to use ideas exist in the manuscript or show the manuscripts which they should review to another person without getting permission from the authors. It is possible that editors turn to colleagues with specific expertise for advice concerning specific, limited aspects of the manuscript while the author’s identity and intellectual property preserve.
VIOLATION OF PUBLICATION ETHICS
All manuscripts under review or published with Journal of Humanities Insights are exposed to screening using Plagiarism Prevention Software. Plagiarism is a serious breach of publication morals. Other breaches such as duplicate publication, data fabrication and distortion, and inappropriate credit of author involvement.
HANDLING CASES OF MISCONDUCT
As soon as Journal of Humanities Insights proves a breach of the journal’s publication morals, Journal of Humanities Insights focuses on moral concerns persistently in various issue-specific standard practices.
SHARING OF REVIEWING RESPONSIBILITIES
It is wrong to share the reviewing responsibility with others and it is the individual responsibility that each journal editor should take.
In general, students and colleagues do not have the right to prepare reviews unless the journal editor has given previous endorsement. Each person who participates in a reviewing process should receive formal appreciation.
SUPPLEMENTS AND SPECIAL SERIES
Complements are groups of papers that deal with associated issues or topics, are published as a distinct issue of the journal or as part of a regular issue and may be subsidized by other sources. Since finance sources can influence the contents of complements via choosing the topics and opinions, journals should adopt the following policies, which also employ to theme subjects, or special collections that are funded by external resources or guest editors:
– The editors of Journal of Humanities Insights have the full responsibility for strategies, practices, and contents of complements such as complete control of the decision to select authors, peer reviewers, and contents for the complement. Editing by the organizations that subsidize the work is not allowed.
– The editors of Journal of Humanities Insights employ one or more external editors of the complement and must bear responsibility for the work of those editors.
– The editors of Journal of Humanities Insights have the right to send complement manuscripts for external peer review and to refuse manuscripts submitted for the complement with or without external review. These conditions should be clarified for authors and any external editors of the complement before starting editorial work.
– It is important to state the sources of the idea for the complement, sources of external funding for the complement’s research and publication and outcomes of the funding source associated with content regarded in the complement. Advertisements in complements should pursue the same policies as those of the main journal.
– The editors of Journal of Humanities Insights must enable readers to recognize easily the difference between ordinary editorial pages and complement pages.
– Journal and supplement editors do not have the right to accept personal helps or direct reward given by the sponsors of supplements.
– republication of papers published elsewhere should be obviously recognized by the citation of the original paper and by the title.
– The same fundamentals of authorship and revelation of possible conflicts of interest argued elsewhere in this document should be exerted to complements.
Creative Commons Attribution
Permit others distribute and copy the manuscript, to create extracts, abstracts, and other revised versions, adaptations or derivative works of or from manuscript (such as a translation), to include in a collective work, to text or data mine the article, even for commercial purposes, as long as they credit the author(s), do not represent the author as endorsing their adaptation of the article, and do not modify the article in such a way as to damage the author’s honor or reputation. Further details found at: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)