All Magazines

Amme İdaresi Dergisi accepts original articles in the fields of public administration, political science, political philosophy, theory of the state, bureaucracy, public law, constitutional law, administrative law, and management sciences. Articles derived from ongoing or completed master's and doctoral theses, as well as articles prepared by expanding papers presented at any congress (whether or not their abstracts have been published), are not accepted or considered for evaluation. Manuscripts that do not comply with the Journal's “Principles of Publication Ethics and Research Ethics,” “Article Submission Rules,” and “Article Writing Rules” cannot be considered for evaluation.

Amme İdaresi Dergisi is indexed in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Social SciSearch, Journal Citation Reports/Social Sciences Edition, the International Institute of Administrative Sciences (IIAS), the European Group for Public Administration (EGPA) Database of Public Administration Journals Published in Native Languages, and the TÜBİTAK-ULAKBİM Social Sciences Database. The languages of publication are Turkish and English. The Journal is published quarterly, in March, June, September, and December.

Articles with more than three authors are not considered for evaluation. Authors must provide brief professional biographies including their academic and/or administrative titles, fields of study, principal publications, contact information (institutional addresses, correspondence addresses, telephone numbers, and e-mail addresses), and ORCID iDs.

No royalties or publication fees are paid for published articles.

Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli University holds all publication rights to articles accepted for publication, including the right to publish the full text in physical and electronic formats. Responsibility for the views expressed in published articles rests with the authors.

PUBLICATION ETHICS

EVALUATION AND PUBLICATION OF MANUSCRIPTS

Manuscripts submitted to Amme İdaresi Dergisi are initially evaluated in terms of formal requirements and, where the manuscript is in English, language quality, as well as field and content. Accordingly, manuscripts that do not comply with the “Publication and Research Ethics,” “Article Submission Rules,” and “Article Writing Rules” fail the preliminary evaluation and are rejected. Manuscripts that pass the preliminary evaluation are sent by the Editor to the relevant field editors for assessment of quality and disciplinary fit. For manuscripts receiving a favorable assessment, the peer-review process is initiated with the approval of the Editorial Board and the Editor.

Articles submitted to Amme İdaresi Dergisi are evaluated through a double-blind editorial board and double-blind peer-review process. Manuscripts subject to blind assessment by the field editors are reviewed by referees who are experts on the subject of the study. Throughout this process, in which confidentiality and impartiality are applied with particular care, all evaluations concerning the manuscript are protected. Initially, each manuscript is evaluated by two referees through blind peer review. However, if one referee recommends that the manuscript not be published (REJECT), the manuscript is submitted to a third referee. Further action is taken in accordance with the third referee's positive or negative opinion; in other words, on the basis of either two recommendations for acceptance or two recommendations against publication. Manuscripts for which revision is requested are resubmitted to the Journal after correction and are sent to the referee for a second review to verify whether the requested revisions have been made. Accordingly, the referee may recommend against publication if the revisions have not been made or, in some cases, may find the revisions satisfactory while making additional recommendations.

ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE EDITOR

Articles submitted to Amme İdaresi Dergisi are evaluated through a double-blind editorial board and double-blind peer-review process. Articles undergo preliminary review by the Editorial Board, and those found suitable are sent to two separate referees. Where the two referees disagree, the opinion of a third referee is sought. In light of the referees' reports, a decision is made to publish the article, request revisions from the author in accordance with the reports, or reject the article. A decision on whether a submitted article will be published is made after it has received favorable evaluations from at least two referees. The Editor is responsible for conducting this process in accordance with ethical principles.

The Editor is obliged to evaluate a manuscript impartially in accordance with the Journal's scope, principles, publication policies, and ethical principles, without taking the identity of the author into consideration. The Editor is also responsible for ensuring that information concerning the manuscript and the author remains confidential throughout the process, except insofar as disclosure to relevant persons (assistant editors) is necessary.

The Editor is particularly responsible for assessing studies involving human participants in terms of ethics committee permissions and for excluding from evaluation studies that lack the required approval from the relevant committee. In addition, the Editor is responsible for checking various important matters concerning the manuscript, including the use of artificial intelligence, the declaration/undertaking, and the similarity rate. The Editor is responsible for observing the Journal's publication principles and international standards in decisions concerning publication.

ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF REVIEWERS

Reviewers should assess whether a manuscript received by invitation falls within their field of expertise and, if it does not, should inform the Journal's editorial office without delay. Reviewers who accept an invitation to evaluate a manuscript are primarily responsible for completing the review within the specified time. They are also obliged to conduct the review objectively while observing the principle of confidentiality. Reviewers are responsible for informing the Editor of any unethical conduct or similar issue they encounter in relation to the manuscript. In evaluating a manuscript, reviewers are responsible for considering the following matters:

the originality of the manuscript, its scientific content, formal characteristics, compliance with the rules of scientific ethics, significance to the field, and contribution to the field. Reviewers must fulfill these responsibilities within the framework of ethical principles. They must also explain in detail, in the evaluation form, the reasons underlying all positive or negative opinions regarding the manuscript.

Another responsibility of reviewers concerns the use of artificial intelligence during the manuscript evaluation process. Manuscripts are submitted to reviewers on the basis of their expertise, disciplinary knowledge, and competence and must be evaluated without the use of artificial intelligence tools. This requirement also forms part of the reviewer's duty of confidentiality.

RESEARCH ETHICS

Amme İdaresi Dergisi bases its ethical principles and publication policy on COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics). Within this framework, the editorial review process, peer-review process, and authors' ethical responsibilities are intended to be organized in accordance with the recommendations and guidelines provided by COPE.

ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS

Similarity Report

Articles submitted to Amme İdaresi Dergisi must be prepared in accordance with academic and scientific ethical standards, and a plagiarism screening report (intihal.net, Turnitin, etc.) must be submitted together with the manuscript. The Journal may also obtain a similarity report for the manuscript where it deems necessary. Articles submitted to Amme İdaresi Dergisi must be prepared in accordance with academic and scientific ethical standards, and a plagiarism screening report (intihal.net, Turnitin, etc.) must be submitted together with the manuscript. The section of the similarity report showing the similarity percentage and the section displaying the text must be combined in a single document; the similarity report must not be submitted as two separate documents. Manuscripts with a similarity rate exceeding 20% are not accepted by Amme İdaresi Dergisi.

Ethics Committee

“Ethics Committee Permission/Approval” must have been obtained for all studies involving the collection of data from participating individuals through methods such as interviews (of any type), focus groups, surveys, observation, and experiments. This approval must also be stated in detail in the “Method” section of the study and additionally on the final page of the manuscript. The information must include the name of the ethics committee, the meeting number or relevant document number, and the date of the decision. The document concerning “Ethics Committee Permission” must be submitted together with the manuscript. For studies that do not require ethics committee approval, a statement in the following format must be included in the work (It should appear immediately before the "Findings" heading);

Ethics Decleration (The following statement must be used in studies containing any data)

“This study is based on the analysis of secondary data and does not require ethics committee approval”

Amme İdaresi Dergisi Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence and Generative Artificial Intelligence

1. Purpose scope and definitions

This policy governs the responsible use of artificial intelligence (AI), generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), and AI-assisted tools in the research, preparation, and evaluation of manuscripts submitted to and published in the journal. It applies to authors, reviewers, editors, and other individuals involved in the editorial process. AI encompasses systems that perform classification, prediction, analysis, or similar tasks; GenAI encompasses systems that generate new content, including text, images, audio, video, and code. The integration of an AI feature into a tool does not place its use outside the scope of this policy.

The core principles of this policy are scientific integrity, human oversight, transparency, verifiability, confidentiality, respect for intellectual property rights, and fairness. Disclosure of tool use does not in itself establish that such use is acceptable. The use of AI does not diminish existing obligations concerning authorship or research ethics.

2. Human responsibility and authorship

AI tools may not be listed as authors or co-authors; they cannot meet authorship criteria or assume responsibility for the accuracy, originality, or integrity of a study. All authors must approve the final version of the submission and are responsible for the accuracy, sources, methodological validity, and ethical compliance of all content, including tool outputs. Tool-generated suggestions may be used only following critical review by the authors and with their substantive scholarly contribution. Scholarly judgement concerning the research question, theoretical rationale, interpretation of findings, and conclusions rests with the authors.

3. Use in the research process

AI-assisted searching, transcription, translation, coding, classification, programming, modelling, statistical analysis, and data visualisation may be used, provided that such use is consistent with the research design and relevant ethical approvals. Any use that affects the findings or conclusions must be described in the Methods section, specifying the name of the tool and its provider, the model or version where available, the purpose of use, the procedural steps, human oversight, validation, and, where necessary, data protection measures. To ensure reproducibility, relevant prompts, settings, code, and validation records must be retained under appropriate conditions and made available upon a reasonable request from the editor, with due regard for confidentiality and intellectual property rights.

AI output must not be presented as actual observations, interviews, documents, or measurements. Synthetic data may be used only where their use is explicitly justified in the research design, they are distinguishable from real data, and their limitations are explained. The deceptive generation or alteration of real data, participant statements, statistics, or results is prohibited. Authors must check AI-assisted analyses for errors, bias, and appropriateness.

4. Use in manuscript preparation

Authors may use GenAI to explore the literature, test ideas, organise a draft, improve language and readability, or translate text they have written themselves. Such use must not replace the author's original contribution or critical assessment. Presenting GenAI output verbatim or without adequate review as the core argument, literature synthesis, discussion, or conclusion is unacceptable. Authors are expected to edit the content they use and to verify claims, quotations, and references against the original publications.

Routine use of tools solely to correct spelling, punctuation, and basic grammar, without changing meaning or textual structure, does not require a separate explicit disclosure. Use involving substantive rewriting, translation, content organisation, or a contribution to scholarly content must be disclosed. Assistive technologies used for accessibility do not require separate disclosure where they perform only those functions.

5. Disclosure and record keeping requirements

At submission, authors must indicate in the AI and GenAI Use Disclosure Form (The declaration form is located at the bottom of the page) whether such tools have been used. Where disclosure is required, authors must specify the tool's name and model or version, if available, the stage at which it was used, its specific purpose, the extent of its use, and how its output was checked. Use relating to the research methodology must be explained in the Methods section; use relating to manuscript preparation must be described under a separate heading, “Declaration of AI Use”, before the references. The declaration may briefly refer to information provided in the Methods section. This declaration must remain visible in the published article. The author team must notify the editor of any new or changed use between submission and acceptance. All authors are responsible for the accuracy of the disclosure.

Example declaration: “During the preparation of this article, (tool/model) was used for (specific purpose and stage). The outputs were reviewed by the authors, and the necessary corrections and independent checks were carried out. The authors take responsibility for the entire content of the study.” Where no such tools were used, the following statement may be used: “No AI tools requiring disclosure were used in the research or manuscript preparation processes for this study.”

6. References quotations and intellectual property rights

Authors must locate every source suggested by AI and verify its bibliographic details and the relevant claim against the original source. Non-existent publications, authors, DOIs, quotations, or data must not be used. An AI tool must not be cited in place of the primary source supporting a scholarly claim; where the AI system itself is the object of research, it must be appropriately identified. Authors must respect third-party copyright, licences, and the tools' terms of use; they are responsible for plagiarism or unauthorised derivative content.

7. Confidentiality and data protection

Participants' personal or sensitive data, unpublished third-party texts, reviewer reports, and restricted-access documents must not be entered into external AI systems without the necessary authorisation, an appropriate legal and ethical basis, and verified security safeguards. Anonymisation alone is not sufficient in every case; the risks of re-identification, data retention, model training, third-party access, and the conditions governing international transfers must also be assessed. Such use must be consistent with the information provided to research participants, ethics committee approval, and data use permissions.

8. Images audio video and tables

Images, diagrams, audio, video, and other media generated or substantially modified using AI must be identified in an appropriate description or caption; the tool used and the nature of the intervention must be disclosed. Conceptual or illustrative images must be clearly labelled. Fabricated field images, participant recordings, or manipulated research materials that create the impression of empirical evidence are unacceptable. Data-based charts and tables must be checked for consistency with the source data; original materials must be provided to the editor where necessary. The editor may require an image to be modified or removed because of risks concerning rights, accuracy, or misleading presentation.

9. Reviewers' obligations

The review invitation, manuscript, supplementary materials, data, correspondence, and reviewer report are confidential. Reviewers must not upload these materials to publicly accessible AI tools or tools whose confidentiality has not been confirmed. Even when using a secure tool authorised in advance in writing by the journal, reviewers must inform the editor of the extent of use and conduct the scholarly assessment themselves. They must not delegate an independent peer review decision to an AI tool; they may use routine language correction that involves no confidential content. Any suspicion of undisclosed use must be communicated to the editor with supporting reasons; accusations must not be based solely on a detection tool's score.

10. Editors' obligations

Editors and the editorial team must not upload submission files or confidential correspondence to AI services that do not guarantee confidentiality. For limited administrative use of secure tools approved by the journal, the purpose, access arrangements, data retention, and human oversight must be specified. Editors remain responsible for reviewer selection, assessment of scholarly suitability, and publication decisions; automated outputs alone cannot constitute the grounds for a decision. Editors must assess disclosures consistently and without discrimination and contact authors for any additional information required.

11. Potential breaches and editorial action

Where incomplete disclosure, unverifiable references, a breach of confidentiality, or content manipulation is suspected, the editor must assess the specific evidence and give the individuals concerned an opportunity to explain. An AI detection software result alone does not constitute evidence of a breach. Depending on the nature and severity of the issue, measures may include completion of the disclosure, correction, additional verification, suspension of the review process, rejection, or correction or retraction of a published article. In serious cases, notification of the relevant institutions may be considered in accordance with applicable procedures and publication ethics principles. The action taken and the reasons for the decision must be documented; authors' appeals must be examined under the journal's publication ethics procedure.

12. Basis and sources consulted

YÖK (Council of Higher Education) (2024), Ethical Guidelines on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Scientific Research and Publication Activities at Higher Education Institutions: https://www.yok.gov.tr/Documents/2024/yapay-zeka-kullanimina-dair-etik-rehber.pdf

TÜBİTAK, Guidelines for the Responsible and Trustworthy Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Support Processes: https://tubitak.gov.tr/tr/kurumsal/hakkimizda/uretken-yapay-zeka-rehberi

COPE, Authorship and AI tools: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/cope-position/authorship-and-ai-tools

Elsevier, Generative AI policies for journals: https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies-and-standards/generative-ai-policies-for-journals

ICMJE, Recommendations: Use of Artificial Intelligence in Publishing: https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/

JPAD, Principles for the Use of Artificial Intelligence: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jpad/page/20028

Conflict of Interest Declaration

A declaration concerning any potential conflict of interest arising from a relationship with any institution or organization, or stating that no such conflict exists, must be included immediately before the References section at the end of the manuscript. Any conflict of interest among the authors must also be stated.

Undertaking

Articles submitted for publication in Amme İdaresi Dergisi must not have been published elsewhere or submitted elsewhere for publication. The following undertaking, stating that the article has neither been published elsewhere nor submitted elsewhere, must be signed by the authors, scanned, and attached to the manuscript:

I hereby declare and undertake that my article entitled “…………...” submitted to you for publication in Amme İdaresi Dergisi has not been published in another periodical, book, etc., and has not been submitted elsewhere for publication. If the contrary is proven, I accept full legal responsibility.

Author's Responsibility During the Publication Evaluation Process

Authors have certain responsibilities regarding the revisions required for a manuscript. The author must prepare an explanatory response note for the referee requesting revision and indicate which revision was made on which page and in which paragraph. The author must also show the corrected sections in the manuscript and submit the revised manuscript to the Journal together with the response note for transmission to the referee.

Once the evaluation of a manuscript has begun, the author may not request the addition of a different author, the removal of an existing author, or a change in the order of authors other than the order in which the manuscript was accepted.

Manuscripts that do not comply with Amme İdaresi Dergisi's “Principles of Publication Ethics and Research Ethics,” “Article Submission Rules,” and “Article Writing Rules” will be rejected directly. It is therefore the author's responsibility to comply with the relevant rules in preparing and submitting the manuscript.