Publication Ethics & Malpractice

The ethics statements of the Journal of ROL Sport Sciences (JROLSS) are based on the Code of Conduct guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), available at  JROLSS follows the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, and Core Practices, and aims to adhere to its Best Practice Guidelines. As a strong JROLSS scientific community (i.e., the publisher, editors, authors, and reviewers) we all are obliged to comply with these ethical practices.


Journal of ROL Sport Sciences is an independent, non-profit, and self-publishing academic journal, and the "Journal of ROL Sport Sciences" is defined as a “Publisher” (as hereinafter defined).

Publisher has to prepare policies and design the journal’s website according to COPE’s Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

The publisher agrees to make all accepted manuscripts open access under the CC BY license by charging a publication fee at the time of submission, processing and/or publication.

Publisher agrees to work with editors, editorial board members, and editors' assistants to determine the journal policies in line with COPE periodically and follows these policies.

Publisher guarantees editorial independence, respect the peer review process and disclaims being involved in editorial decisions.

Publisher guarantees to publish the volume and issues on a timely basis.

Publisher declares to remain neutral concerning jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliation.

Publisher conducts rules and policies for research ethics, consent, including confidentiality, and the legal requirements for human and animal research.

Publisher conducts the relationship rules between publisher, editors and third-parties in any contract, protects intellectual property and copyright, respects privacy and supports editorial independence.

Publisher guarantees not to allow any sponsors to be involved in decisions about the journal's publishing policies even if they support the publisher financially.

Publisher guarantees to comply with the journal's publishing policies, particularly in the context of transparency and integrity (e.g., research funding, conflicts of interest, and reporting standards).

The publisher guarantees to comply with the journal's publishing policies, particularly in the context of appeals and complaints.

The publisher guarantees to maintain the integrity of the scientific work.

The publisher guarantees to assist-third parties (grant funders, institutions, etc.) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and to facilitate the resolution of these cases whenever possible.

Publisher guarantees to publish clarifications, corrections, and retractions based on editorial board decisions.


JROLSS editors are independent, decisions about the editorial review process are not determined by any third-party agencies or governments' policies.

JROLSS editors are responsible for the peer-review process of the manuscripts and make the last decision on which manuscripts will be published based on the reviewers’ and editorial board members’ comments.

JROLSS editors carry out the editorial review of the submitted manuscript entirely based on its scientific merit regardless of the author's gender, age, sexual orientation, race, citizenship, ethnic background, religion, political view, and institutional affiliation.

JROLSS editors are responsible for implementing and carrying out the publication policies of the journal.

JROLSS editors govern the process by forming the committee from the editorial board members in cases such as copyright violation, plagiarism, and libel.

JROLSS editors, editorial board members, and editors' assistants may not expose any information publicly about the submitted manuscript to anyone except the corresponding author and the publisher.

JROLSS Head Editor has full authority to publish the journal's content timely regarding accepted manuscripts.

JROLSS editors are responsible for assigning the manuscripts to reviewers who have expertise in the related research fields.

JROLSS editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts should undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers whose research is related to the submitted manuscripts. If the decision is inconclusive, JROLSS editors assign a third reviewer to reach out for a conclusive decision.

JROLSS editors, editorial board members and editors' assistants cannot use unpublished materials and information in submitted manuscripts for their own research purpose without the authors' written consent.

JROLSS editors cannot use the privileged information or ideas obtained from handling manuscripts for their personal advantage and are responsible for keeping them confidential.

JROLSS editors refrain from carrying out the editorial processes of the manuscripts that have conflicts of interest arising from competition, collaboration or other relationships with any of the authors, companies or institutions affiliated with them; instead of this, they have to ask another editorial board member to carry out to the editorial process of the manuscripts.

JROLSS editors require all contributors of the published manuscripts to disclose related competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other suitable actions will be taken, such as the retraction or declaration of concern.

JROLSS editors protect the integrity of the published manuscripts by corrections and retractions when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper.

JROLSS editors are responsible for tracking reviewers' and editorial misconduct. When ethical complaints have been presented concerning the submitted or published manuscripts, JROLSS editors should take measures in line with the journal's policies.

JROLSS editors will investigate every reported act of unethical publishing, even if it is exposed years after publishing. If the unethical violation is well-founded, retraction or correction rules will be applied and published in the journal.

JROLSS editors follow the COPE Flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct.

JROLSS editors, editorial board members, and editors' assistants are welcome to submit their original manuscripts to the JROLSS, but they have to know that they cannot be involved in the peer-review and editorial decision-making process for their own manuscripts. In this case, the publisher chooses a guest editor for the JROLSS editors, editorial board members, and editors’ assistants' manuscripts to handle independently the peer-review and editorial decision-making process. The publisher clearly states the case to the readers (e.g., via a footnote, endnote on the article or on the journal website) on how to carry out the JROLSS staff's manuscripts. When JROLSS encounters disagreements, JROLSS follows COPE Guidelines.


Peer-review is the process used to evaluate the quality of the manuscripts before they are published. Therefore, independent researchers whose field of research are related to the submitted manuscript must evaluate the manuscripts for validity, originality, and significance to assist editors to conclude whether the manuscript should be published in JROLSS.

JROLSS reviewers must acknowledge that all manuscripts are reviewed with impartiality based on the scientific content of the manuscripts regardless of the author's gender, age, sexual orientation, race, citizenship, ethnic background, religion, political view, and institutional affiliation.

JROLSS reviewers are expected to inform the editor in charge if any conflict of interest arises to decline the request of review for the assigned manuscript.

JROLSS reviewers must acknowledge being constructive and objective in their reviews, avoiding being unfriendly or inflammatory and making libellous or degrading personal comments.

JROLSS reviewers must acknowledge reviewing the manuscripts falling within their expertise of research on time.

JROLSS reviewers cannot use the privileged information or ideas obtained from reviewed manuscripts for their personal advantage/disadvantage or to discredit others.

JROLSS reviewers must acknowledge that all information concerning the manuscripts is held confidential.

JROLSS reviewers must confirm that the detailed reviewing report must be shared with the JROLSS editors confidentially through the journal management system.

JROLSS reviewers can state the following four decisions for the submitted manuscripts:

  • Accept for Publication
  • Revisions Required (Accept with minor revisions: Revisions are checked by the editors)
  • Resubmit for Review (Major revisions: It will be reviewed for the second round) 
  • Reject (It is not recommended for publishing)
  • Submit Elsewhere (It is not within the scope of the journal: Reject)

Based on the reviewers' decisions third or fourth reviewer can be assigned. In such a case, the same process of review will be performed.


Everyone who meets the JROLSS criteria for authorship must be listed as an author. JROLSS expects that all authors will take public responsibility for the content of the manuscripts submitted to the JROLSS. The contributions of all authors must be described in the "Declarations" section of the manuscript. All authors should be contacted by email during the submission to ensure that they are aware of and approve the submission of the manuscript, its content, and its authorship. 

Authors should confirm that the submitted manuscripts are not plagiarised, unpublished, original, and not submitted elsewhere at the same time.

Authors must confirm that they take full accountability against issues of plagiarism, copyright infringement or other violations. Therefore, if there are third-party copyright materials, copyrighted tables, illustrations, figures, or quotations published elsewhere or other works in their manuscripts, they must hold permission or acknowledgement and declare it clearly to the editorial board with a cover letter during the submission.

Authors must have obtained consent, and ethical approval and followed ethical legislation if their research includes human and animal subjects and they have to declare how they perform the ethical principles as an endnote or in the method section.

Authors should declare clearly any potential conflict of interest clearly for each author.

Authors should submit their manuscripts which are completed/written honestly, clearly, and without falsification, fabrication, or improper data manipulation. Authors should present their research methods clearly so that researchers can confirm the results and not false or wittingly mistaken statements that create unethical behaviour.

Authors may be demanded to ensure the raw data regarding submission for editorial review, and should, in any event, be ready to keep such data for a reasonable amount of time after publication.

Authors should submit manuscripts only that have been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and that comply with the journal's publishing policies and scope.

Authors should acknowledge that resources such as data/support/financial have been used in improving the manuscript. These resources can be defined as Grant Maker, Foundation, or institutions, that provided ideas and expertise that greatly supported the research.

Authors should acknowledge that if they find any mistakes or inaccuracies after publishing manuscripts, they must inform the JROLSS editors.

Authors should submit their manuscripts only to one journal at a time. Authors should be aware that submitting the same article to more than one journal at the same time creates unethical publishing behaviour and it is unacceptable.

Authors must confirm that the Publisher retains all the copyrights unconditionally and indefinitely to distribute the published manuscripts.


Researchers submitting candidate articles to JROLSS must adhere to the rules set out in the following 6 points and sub-points.

1. Protective measures: In studies involving vulnerable groups, special safeguards should be put in place to protect the rights of participants. These measures should aim to ensure the physical and emotional well-being of participants.

a. Risk assessment and precautions: Before research begins, potential risks should be carefully assessed and appropriate precautions taken. All necessary precautions should be taken to protect the physical, emotional and social well-being of participants from vulnerable groups.

b. Selection of participants and ethical behavior: Participants should be selected in accordance with the purpose of the research and cooperation should be sought from those who agree to participate in the research. Researchers should treat participants with respect and protect their rights.

c. Informed participation: Participants from vulnerable groups should be thoroughly informed about the nature, aims, risks and benefits of the research. Participants should understand this information and give or withhold consent before participating in the research.

d. Principle of voluntariness: Participants should choose to participate in research of their own free will and not be coerced. Participants should have the right to withdraw from the research at any time.

e. Risk management and emergency plan: A risk management plan should be prepared for potential risks and a contingency plan for emergencies. Researchers should respond quickly and effectively when confronted with unexpected events or emergencies.

2. Procedure for consent: Consent must be obtained from participants in a manner appropriate to the nature of the research and the participant’s situation. In particular, consent must be obtained from parents, legal guardians or an appropriately authorized person in the case of underage participants or persons with limited abilities.

a. Explaining the research: Participants should be thoroughly informed about the purpose, process, expectations, and potential risks and benefits of the research. This should be done to ensure that participants have a full understanding before taking part in the research.

b. Written consent forms: Participants must sign written consent forms in order to participate in the study. These forms should include details about the research, the participant’s rights, confidentiality and security measures, and the right to withdraw consent.

c. Underage participants: In the case of underage participants, the consent of their legal guardians or parents must be obtained. However, when providing information to participants, age-appropriate language should be used and participants should be informed in a way they can understand.

d. Comprehensive information: Participants should be fully informed about the research before deciding whether or not to participate. This information process should allow participants to raise any concerns or questions they may have.

e. Continuous communication: Throughout the research process, participants should remain in constant contact and be informed of any changes and updates.

3. Informed consent: Participants should be given full informed consent that includes information about the purpose of the research, the procedures, the potential risks and benefits. Participants should have full access to all information before participating in the research.

a. Comprehensive information process: Participants should be fully informed about the research. This information process should include detailed information about the purpose, method, duration, expected results, potential risks and benefits of the research.

b. Comprehensible language: When providing information to participants, complex terms should be avoided and comprehensible language should be used. To help participants understand the research and make decisions, the process of providing information should be simple and clear.

c. Opportunity for questions and answers: Participants should have the opportunity to ask questions and raise concerns during the debriefing. Researchers should answer all participants’ questions in a descriptive manner and take their concerns seriously.

d. Written information material: Written information material about the research should be made available to participants. These materials should include details about the research, the participant’s rights, and the right to withdraw consent.

e. Continuously monitor the process of providing information: Researchers should continually seek feedback to ensure that participants understand the debriefing process and repeat the debriefing process as needed.

f. Consent process: After the participants have been fully informed about their participation in the study and all questions have been answered, they must give or withhold their consent by signing the written consent forms.

4. Confidentiality: The confidentiality and privacy of participants from vulnerable groups must be carefully protected. Participants’ personal data must be treated confidentially and used only in the context of the research.

a. Protection of personal data: The personal data of participants from vulnerable groups involved in the research may only be used to the extent necessary for the purposes of the research. This information may not be used or disclosed to identify participants.

b. Information security: Research data must be protected by appropriate security measures and safeguarded against the risk of unauthorized access, alteration or loss. Secure methods must be used for the storage and transmission of data.

c. Anonymity and coding: During data collection, participants’ identities should be kept as confidential as possible. For data analysis, coded or anonymized data should be used instead of directly identifying participants.

d. Disclosure to third parties: Research data should not be shared with third parties without the consent of participants. However, where required by law or ethical guidelines, such disclosure must be handled appropriately.

e. Breaches of confidentiality and notifications: In the event of a breach of confidentiality, appropriate action must be taken immediately and the affected parties notified. Participants should be provided with a reliable communication channel to raise privacy concerns.

5. Duty to report: Researchers are obliged to report any suspicion of abuse, exploitation or neglect to the competent authorities. This reporting is essential to ensure the safety and welfare of participants.

a. Reporting ethical violations: Researchers should promptly report ethical violations or suspected misconduct to the appropriate ethics review committee or authorities. This also applies to ethical violations, abuse or neglect during the research process.

b. Breaches of confidentiality: Researchers must act quickly in the event of a breach of confidentiality and notify the appropriate individuals or institutions. This may be the unauthorized disclosure of participants’ personal data or unauthorized access.

c. Participant safety: If researchers become aware of a risk to participant safety during the research process, they must report it immediately to the appropriate authorities. This may include any situation that threatens the physical, emotional or social well-being of participants.

d. Emergencies and crisis situations: When emergencies or crisis situations occur, researchers must respond quickly and effectively and inform the relevant authorities. These may include natural disasters, social events or other unexpected situations.

e. Report to relevant organizations: In the event of ethical violations or emergencies, the appropriate ethics review committees, college administration, or other authorized entities should be notified. This will ensure that the necessary action is taken and problems are resolved.

6. Ethics committee approvals: For research involving vulnerable groups, you must obtain the necessary approvals from ethics review committees. These approvals ensure that the research meets ethical standards and protects the rights of participants.

a. Requirement and implementation: Researchers must obtain prior approval from the ethics committee for studies involving participants from vulnerable groups. These approvals include the necessary steps to assess the compliance of the research with ethical standards.

b. Procedure for applying for permits: Researchers should provide detailed information about the purpose of the research, the method, the potential risks and benefits to participants when applying for ethics committee approval.

c. Evaluation and feedback: Upon receipt of the application, the Ethics Review Committee carefully evaluates the ethical aspects of the research and provides feedback to the researcher as appropriate. Researchers must make the necessary corrections and provide the required information or documents to meet the panel’s requirements.

d. Monitoring and reporting: Throughout the research process, researchers should follow the instructions and conditions of the Ethics Committee and report appropriately. This will ensure that the progress of the research and any ethical issues or problems are identified in a timely manner.

e. Continuity of authorizations: Researchers must obtain additional approvals from the Ethics Review Committee when they make changes or move to a new phase of the research process. This ensures that research continues to meet ethical standards.

Authorship & Contributorship

All authors’ roles must be described in the "Declarations" section on manuscripts and should be contacted during submission to ensure that they are aware of and approve the submission, its content, and its authorship. 

The authors’ order should be based on the contributions of the manuscript. The authorship should not be ordered according to academic position or other indicators of power. All contributing authors should be credited in the order of their contribution to the authoring process.

All those who have contributed to the production of an intellectual output are entitled to be listed as authors. "Ghost" authoring should not be allowed and it is not acceptable to list as authors people who have not directly contributed to the research or its written outputs as authors.

All authors' status and institutional location should be made visible in research and its outputs.

Authors have a fundamental obligation to acknowledge and attribute to all external sources, financial or in-kind, such as organizations or sponsors that contribute directly or indirectly to the research.

Authors should explain the publication history of the articles or books they submit for publication. If an existing article or book is substantially similar in content and format to a previously published article, this should be noted and the place of previous publication indicated.

When JROLSS encounters disagreements among authors, JROLSS follows the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)—see here and here.

Update: 04.30.2024