FIRST SECTION
Purpose, Scope, Basis
Purpose
Article 1 - (1) This Regulation is prepared to determine the ethical rules to be followed in scientific research, studies, publications, and activities, and to outline the duties, powers, responsibilities, procedures, and principles of scientific research and publication ethics boards to be established within higher education institutions.
Scope
Article 2 - (1) This Regulation covers:
a) Scientific research and studies conducted by members of higher education institutions or individuals, irrespective of their affiliation with higher education institutions, in obtaining academic titles and subsequent activities, and related research ethics issues regarding supported and/or conducted scientific research and development projects,
b) Research ethics issues related to theses and scientific publications during postgraduate education and conducted scientific research and development projects,
c) Publication ethics issues concerning all types of publications published or submitted for publication in any press, visual, and auditory media by members of higher education institutions both domestically and internationally,
ç) Ethical violations in biomedical research involving human subjects and in ecological studies.
Basis
Article 3 - (1) This Regulation is prepared based on Articles 24, 42, and 65 of the Higher Education Law No. 2547.
SECOND SECTION
Actions Contrary to Scientific Research and Publication Ethics
Article 4 - (1) Actions contrary to scientific research and publication ethics include:
a) Plagiarism: Presenting others' original ideas, methods, data, or works as one's own, either partially or fully, without proper citation,
b) Falsification: Using data that does not exist or has been altered in scientific research,
c) Fabrication: Altering research records or obtained data, presenting unused equipment or materials as used, distorting or manipulating research results to serve the interests of supporting individuals or organizations,
ç) Self-Plagiarism: Presenting duplicate publications as separate works in academic appointments and promotions,
d) Salami Slicing: Dividing a research's results inappropriately into multiple publications and presenting them as separate works in academic appointments and promotions,
e) Unjustified Authorship: Including individuals without active contribution as authors or excluding those who made a significant contribution, changing author order without justification, removing names of those with contributions in subsequent editions, or including one's name as an author using influence without contribution.
(2) Other types of ethical violations include:
a) Failing to acknowledge the support of individuals, institutions, or organizations in publications resulting from supported research,
b) Using unpublished or unaccepted theses or works as sources without the permission of the owner,
c) Not adhering to ethical rules in research involving humans and animals, or failing to respect patient rights in publications,
ç) Acting contrary to regulations in biomedical research and other clinical studies,
d) Sharing information from a work under review with others without the author's explicit permission,
e) Using resources, facilities, and equipment allocated for scientific research for purposes other than their intended use,
f) Making unfounded, unjustified, and intentional accusations of ethical violations,
g) Publishing data obtained from surveys and attitude studies without obtaining explicit consent from participants or the institution if conducted in an institution,
h) Causing harm to animal welfare and ecological balance in research and experiments,
ı) Not obtaining written permissions from authorized units before starting research and experiments,
i) Conducting research and experiments contrary to the relevant laws or international agreements to which Turkey is a party,
j) Failing to inform and warn relevant parties about potential harmful practices related to scientific research,
k) Not using data and information obtained from other individuals and institutions in accordance with permission and ensuring its confidentiality and protection,
l) Providing false or misleading statements about scientific research and publications in academic appointments and promotions.
Actions Not Considered as Violations of Scientific Research and Publication Ethics
Article 5 - (1) The use of anonymous information, basic scientific knowledge, mathematical theorems, and proofs, provided that the original style and expression of another’s work are not used, is not considered an ethical violation.
THIRD SECTION
Formation, Duties, Working Procedures and Principles of Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Boards in Higher Education Institutions
Formation of Boards
Article 6 - (1) Scientific research and publication ethics boards in higher education institutions are established in the fields of social and human sciences, health sciences, and natural and engineering sciences. These boards consist of seven members selected by the rector from professors in the relevant scientific fields for a two-year term. If there are not enough professors in the institution to meet these criteria, a single board consisting of seven members can be established.
(2) Different ethics boards for various scientific fields can be formed if deemed necessary to ensure efficiency in their work.
(3) The appointed board members must not have a finalized judicial or administrative decision for ethical violations.
(4) The term of a board member found to have committed an ethical violation ends with the rector’s decision.
(5) A member whose term has ended can be re-elected following the same procedure. Membership ends automatically for those who miss three consecutive meetings without permission or are on leave for at least six months. A new member is selected in the same manner to fill any vacancies.
(6) The heads of scientific research and publication ethics boards are selected by the rector. Each board head appoints a vice-chair from among the board members. The vice-chair’s term ends with the end of the chair’s term.
(7) The secretariat of the scientific research and publication ethics boards is managed by the legal advisory office of the higher education institution.
Duties of the Boards
Article 7 - (1) The duties of scientific research and publication ethics boards are:
a) To examine allegations of ethical violations, including obtaining expert opinions if necessary through the rectorate, corresponding with relevant individuals and institutions, requesting information, and performing other necessary actions during the investigation,
b) To present the decisions taken after the examination to the rector,
c) To recommend educational activities to eliminate potential ethical violations in academic, research, and publication matters through collaboration with relevant units or institutions.
Meeting Procedures and Principles of Ethics Boards
Article 8 - (1) Scientific research and publication ethics boards convene and make decisions with a simple majority of members. In meetings where the chair is absent, the vice-chair presides.
(2) The boards conduct their work personally but may seek opinions from experts if necessary.
(3) The following individuals cannot be assigned as experts or specialists in the review process:
a) The thesis advisors or members of the associate professorship jury of the involved individual,
b) Faculty members from the involved individual's own university,
c) The spouse and relatives up to the third degree (including third degree) of the involved individual,
ç) Individuals with conflicts of interest with the involved person.
(4) If there are no faculty members in the specific scientific field of the involved individual, experts from the closest scientific field or a legal expert may be appointed. If multiple experts are appointed, each expert prepares a separate report.
(5) Experts must prepare and submit their reports within one month from receiving the files, with a possible extension of up to one month.
(6) Board members must not participate in meetings where ethical violations concerning individuals with whom they have previously collaborated or are alleged to have committed violations are discussed.
Application to Ethics Boards and Working Procedures
Article 9 - (1) Allegations of ethical violations submitted to the higher education institution are reviewed by the institution’s scientific research and publication ethics boards.
(2) All information and documents related to the allegations are submitted to the boards.
(3) A separate file is opened for each application received by the higher education institution.
(4) If a complaint or report includes allegations related to an ongoing associate professorship application, the institution must immediately inquire with the Interuniversity Council Presidency about the status of the application. If an ongoing application is confirmed, all information and documents are forwarded to the Interuniversity Council Presidency.
(5) Persons under investigation for ethical violations are required to provide written defenses within fifteen days from receiving the request. If no defense is provided within this period, the board may make a decision based on other information and evidence, provided this is mentioned in the defense request letter. Individuals under investigation may directly submit their written defenses without waiting for a decision on requesting a defense if they request a copy of the related documents. However, in this case, the documents must explicitly state that failure to submit a defense within fifteen days of receipt will result in decisions based on other information and evidence. Oral defenses may also be taken if deemed necessary.
(6) Decisions taken by the ethics boards are discussed and voted on, and signed by board members. Members dissenting from the decision must write the reasons for their dissent.
(7) Final decisions by the ethics boards are submitted to the rector for approval or alternative decisions.
(8) Board members, experts, and specialists must not disclose the information and documents they obtain during the examination.
(9) Correspondence with other institutions and organizations during the investigation process is conducted through the rectorate.
FOURTH SECTION
Miscellaneous and Final Provisions
Actions Following Examination
Article 10 - (1) Individuals found to have committed actions contrary to scientific research and publication ethics are subject to necessary disciplinary, administrative, legal, and criminal actions by the higher education institution.
(2) If an academic title has been obtained based on the work that was later found to violate ethics, the higher education institution will evaluate whether to revoke the title based on the ethical violation decision.
(3) The responsibility of individuals is not absolved by obtaining consent from affected or harmed parties.
(4) When an ethical violation is detected, the institution must also inform the public institution where the co-authors work.
(5) Ethical violation decisions must be reported to the Higher Education Council Presidency within one month