Ethical Principles

Behavioral and Clinical Studies in Contemporary Psychology is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics, academic integrity, research transparency, and responsible scholarly communication. As a peer-reviewed, open access journal in the fields of behavioral sciences, clinical psychology, psychotherapy, counseling, mental health, and contemporary psychological studies, the journal recognizes its responsibility to protect the credibility of the scientific record and to promote ethical conduct among authors, reviewers, editors, and all individuals involved in the publication process.

The journal expects all submitted manuscripts to be original, scientifically sound, ethically conducted, accurately reported, and prepared in accordance with accepted standards of scholarly publishing. Publication in the journal is based on the academic merit of the manuscript, including its originality, methodological rigor, theoretical contribution, clinical or practical relevance, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the aims and scope of the journal.

The publication process must be based on honesty, transparency, fairness, confidentiality, accountability, and respect for the rights of research participants, authors, reviewers, readers, and the broader academic community. Any form of research misconduct, publication misconduct, unethical authorship practice, plagiarism, data manipulation, duplicate publication, inappropriate citation practice, or abuse of the peer-review process is considered unacceptable.

The journal follows a double-blind anonymous peer-review process. In this process, the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other in order to reduce bias and promote impartial evaluation. Each manuscript is normally reviewed by two or three qualified reviewers, and editorial decisions are made based on reviewer evaluations, editorial judgment, ethical compliance, and the scientific quality of the manuscript.

The journal is committed to ensuring that all ethical concerns are handled carefully, fairly, and consistently. If ethical concerns are raised before, during, or after publication, the editorial team will investigate the matter and take appropriate action. Such action may include requesting clarification from authors, requiring corrections, rejecting a manuscript, issuing an expression of concern, publishing a correction, or retracting an article when necessary.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submitted manuscripts are original, accurate, complete, and ethically prepared. By submitting a manuscript to Behavioral and Clinical Studies in Contemporary Psychology, authors confirm that the work has not been published previously, is not under consideration by another journal, and does not violate the rights of any person, institution, or third party.

Authors must present their research honestly and without fabrication, falsification, selective reporting, inappropriate manipulation of data, or misleading interpretation. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail to allow readers, reviewers, and other researchers to understand the research design, methodology, analysis, findings, and conclusions. Authors should avoid overstating the implications of their findings and should clearly acknowledge the limitations of their study.

Authors must ensure that all sources used in the manuscript are properly cited. Ideas, theories, concepts, data, instruments, images, tables, figures, or text taken from other works must be appropriately acknowledged. Direct quotation should be clearly marked and accurately referenced. Paraphrased material must also be cited. Failure to provide proper credit to the original source may be considered plagiarism.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that all listed authors meet the criteria for authorship. All individuals who made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the study, data collection, data analysis, interpretation of findings, drafting of the manuscript, or critical revision of the manuscript should be appropriately recognized. Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged in the acknowledgments section, with their permission.

The corresponding author is responsible for communication with the journal during submission, peer review, revision, acceptance, and publication. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission. The corresponding author must also ensure that all co-authors are informed of editorial decisions, revision requests, and publication-related communications.

Authors must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that could influence the research, interpretation of results, or presentation of findings. Conflicts of interest may be financial, professional, institutional, academic, personal, or ideological. Disclosure of a conflict of interest does not necessarily prevent publication, but failure to disclose relevant conflicts may be considered unethical.

Authors must disclose all sources of funding and financial support related to the research. If the study received no funding, this should also be clearly stated. Funding sources should not influence the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, or publication of the research. Authors should describe the role of the funder, if any, in the research process.

Authors are expected to retain research data, documentation, consent forms, ethical approval documents, and other relevant materials for a reasonable period after publication. When appropriate and ethically permissible, authors may be asked to provide data, analysis files, or methodological details to support editorial evaluation, respond to ethical concerns, or verify published findings.

Originality and Plagiarism

All manuscripts submitted to Behavioral and Clinical Studies in Contemporary Psychology must be original. The journal does not accept plagiarism in any form. Plagiarism includes copying text, ideas, data, arguments, images, tables, figures, or other materials from another source without proper acknowledgment. It also includes close paraphrasing of another person’s work without citation, presenting another researcher’s ideas as one’s own, or using previously published material without appropriate credit.

The journal uses iThenticate similarity detection software to screen submitted manuscripts for textual overlap. Similarity reports are reviewed by the editorial team to determine whether the overlap is acceptable or problematic. The journal recognizes that some similarity may occur in standard methodological descriptions, references, common terminology, institutional names, or properly cited material. However, extensive overlap, unattributed copying, or inappropriate reuse of published material may lead to rejection or further ethical investigation.

Plagiarism may occur in relation to both published and unpublished material. It may involve journal articles, books, theses, dissertations, conference papers, reports, websites, preprints, unpublished manuscripts, or other sources. Authors are responsible for checking their manuscripts carefully before submission to ensure that all borrowed material is properly cited and that the manuscript represents an original scholarly contribution.

Self-plagiarism, also known as text recycling or redundant reuse, is also unacceptable when authors reuse substantial parts of their own previously published work without proper citation or without making a clear new contribution. Authors may build upon their previous publications, but they must cite those works and clearly explain how the submitted manuscript differs from and extends earlier research.

If plagiarism is detected before publication, the manuscript may be returned to the authors for explanation, rejected, or referred for further ethical review, depending on the severity of the case. If plagiarism is discovered after publication, the journal may publish a correction, issue an expression of concern, retract the article, or take other appropriate measures.

Duplicate Submission and Redundant Publication

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. Simultaneous submission wastes editorial and reviewer resources and may result in duplicate publication. By submitting a manuscript to Behavioral and Clinical Studies in Contemporary Psychology, authors confirm that the manuscript is not under consideration elsewhere.

The journal does not accept manuscripts that have already been published in substantially similar form. Redundant publication occurs when authors publish the same data, analysis, argument, or findings in multiple publications without appropriate disclosure, citation, or justification. This practice can distort the scientific record and create misleading impressions about the amount of evidence available on a topic.

If a manuscript is based on a thesis, dissertation, preprint, conference presentation, research report, or previous publication, authors must clearly disclose this at the time of submission. The editorial team will determine whether the manuscript provides sufficient originality and scholarly contribution for journal publication.

Authors must not divide one study into several small publications merely to increase publication count. This practice, sometimes called salami publication, is unethical when the separate manuscripts do not each provide a distinct and meaningful contribution. If multiple manuscripts are derived from the same dataset or research project, authors should disclose this and clearly explain the relationship among the manuscripts.

Data Integrity, Fabrication, and Falsification

The journal requires that all research findings be reported accurately and honestly. Data fabrication and data falsification are serious forms of research misconduct and are strictly prohibited.

Data fabrication refers to inventing data, cases, observations, responses, interviews, measurements, or results that did not actually exist. Data falsification refers to manipulating research materials, procedures, data, images, statistics, or results in a way that misrepresents the true findings. Both practices undermine scientific trust and may cause harm, especially in clinical and psychological research where findings may influence professional practice, intervention design, and mental health services.

Authors must not omit, alter, suppress, or selectively report data in a way that creates a misleading conclusion. Statistical analyses should be appropriate for the research design and should be reported transparently. Any exclusions, missing data procedures, transformations, subgroup analyses, or changes to the original analysis plan should be clearly explained.

Images, figures, diagrams, charts, and tables must accurately represent the data. Authors must not manipulate visual materials in a way that distorts interpretation. If any image or figure has been modified for clarity, the modification should not misrepresent the original information.

If the editorial team has concerns about data integrity, authors may be asked to provide raw data, ethical approval documents, consent materials, analysis outputs, or additional methodological details. Failure to provide reasonable clarification may lead to rejection, correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a significant scholarly contribution to the manuscript. Authorship is not appropriate for individuals who provided only general supervision, administrative support, funding acquisition, technical assistance, data collection without intellectual contribution, or routine editing unless they also made substantial academic contributions to the work.

All authors should be able to take responsibility for the integrity of the work. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the research or manuscript preparation to approve the final version and to be accountable for relevant parts of the work.

Unethical authorship practices are not acceptable. These include honorary authorship, guest authorship, gift authorship, and ghost authorship. Honorary or guest authorship occurs when a person is listed as an author despite not making a substantial contribution. Gift authorship occurs when authorship is given as a favor or due to position, status, or personal relationship. Ghost authorship occurs when a person who made a substantial contribution is omitted from the author list.

The order of authors should be agreed upon by all authors before submission. Any request to add, remove, or rearrange authors after submission must be explained in writing and approved by all authors. The journal may require confirmation from all authors before making authorship changes.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the author list is accurate, that all authors have approved the submitted version, and that no eligible contributor has been omitted. Disputes about authorship should be resolved by the authors and their institution whenever necessary. The journal may suspend review or publication until authorship disputes are resolved.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any conflicts of interest that may influence, or appear to influence, the evaluation, conduct, interpretation, or publication of a manuscript.

For authors, conflicts of interest may include financial relationships, employment, consultancies, grants, honoraria, paid expert testimony, intellectual property interests, personal relationships, academic competition, institutional affiliations, or ideological commitments that could affect the research. Authors must disclose relevant conflicts in the manuscript or in a separate declaration at submission.

Reviewers must decline to review a manuscript if they have a conflict of interest that could compromise their impartiality. Such conflicts may include recent collaboration with the authors, direct academic competition, personal relationships, financial interests, institutional connections, or strong intellectual bias related to the manuscript topic.

Editors must not handle manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest. If an editor has a conflict, the manuscript should be assigned to another qualified editor or editorial board member. Editorial decisions must be based on academic merit and ethical compliance, not personal, institutional, financial, or professional interests.

Disclosure of a conflict of interest does not automatically mean that the manuscript will be rejected. The purpose of disclosure is to allow transparency and appropriate management. Failure to disclose relevant conflicts, however, may be considered a breach of publication ethics.

Ethical Approval for Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants must be conducted in accordance with accepted ethical principles, including respect for persons, beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, privacy, confidentiality, and voluntary participation. Because the journal publishes research in behavioral and clinical psychology, many submitted studies may involve human participants, clinical populations, clients, students, families, patients, or vulnerable groups.

Authors must state whether their study received approval from an appropriate ethics committee, institutional review board, university ethics board, hospital ethics committee, or equivalent authority. The manuscript should include the name of the approving body and, where applicable, the approval code or reference number.

If a study was exempt from formal ethics approval, authors should clearly explain the reason for exemption. Lack of ethical approval may be acceptable only when consistent with institutional and national regulations and when the study did not pose ethical risks requiring review.

Authors must ensure that participants were treated with dignity and respect. Participation should be voluntary, and participants should have the right to withdraw from the study without penalty. The research should minimize potential harm and avoid unnecessary psychological, emotional, social, educational, or clinical risks.

In studies involving vulnerable populations, such as children, adolescents, individuals with mental health disorders, patients, elderly participants, persons with disabilities, trauma survivors, or individuals under institutional authority, authors must demonstrate additional ethical safeguards. These may include parental or guardian consent, participant assent, careful risk assessment, confidentiality protections, referral procedures, and appropriate professional supervision.

Informed Consent

Authors must obtain informed consent from participants before collecting data, unless an ethics committee has approved a justified waiver of consent. Informed consent means that participants were given sufficient information about the study, including its purpose, procedures, potential risks, potential benefits, confidentiality protections, voluntary nature, and the right to withdraw.

For participants who cannot provide full legal consent, such as minors or individuals with impaired decision-making capacity, consent should be obtained from a parent, legal guardian, or authorized representative, and assent should be obtained from the participant whenever appropriate.

In clinical, counseling, psychotherapy, or intervention studies, informed consent should clearly explain the nature of the intervention, expected duration, possible risks, possible benefits, confidentiality limits, data use, and any alternatives available to participants. Participants should not be misled about the purpose or nature of the intervention.

For studies using interviews, audio recordings, video recordings, photographs, case material, or identifiable personal information, authors must obtain specific consent for recording, analysis, publication, and any use of anonymized quotations or clinical details. Authors should ensure that published material does not reveal the identity of participants unless explicit written permission has been obtained.

Confidentiality and Privacy

The journal requires authors to protect the privacy and confidentiality of research participants. Personal information, clinical details, psychological histories, interview excerpts, case descriptions, photographs, or other identifying information should not be published unless necessary and unless explicit informed consent has been obtained.

Authors must anonymize or de-identify participant data whenever possible. In qualitative research, case studies, and clinical reports, authors should take special care to remove or alter identifying details that are not essential to the scientific value of the manuscript. However, such changes must not distort the meaning of the case or findings.

Confidential information obtained during clinical practice, counseling, psychotherapy, assessment, supervision, or institutional work must not be used for publication without appropriate consent and ethical approval. Authors should respect professional obligations of confidentiality and comply with applicable institutional and legal requirements.

Reviewers and editors must also protect confidentiality. Manuscripts under review are confidential documents and must not be shared, discussed, copied, distributed, or used for personal advantage. Reviewers must not contact authors directly about a manuscript unless explicitly authorized by the journal.

Clinical Studies and Intervention Research

Clinical, therapeutic, counseling, educational, and behavioral intervention studies must be designed and reported ethically. Authors should describe the study design, participant recruitment, inclusion and exclusion criteria, intervention procedures, qualifications of intervention providers, duration and frequency of sessions, control or comparison conditions, outcome measures, and follow-up assessments where applicable.

Clinical and intervention studies should clearly explain how participant safety was protected. If the intervention involved psychological risk, emotional distress, trauma-related content, clinical symptoms, or vulnerable participants, authors should describe risk management procedures, referral mechanisms, monitoring processes, and professional supervision.

Authors should not make unsupported claims about the effectiveness of an intervention. Conclusions should be based on the data and should acknowledge limitations such as sample size, lack of randomization, absence of follow-up, measurement limitations, attrition, therapist effects, or limited generalizability.

When reporting clinical cases, authors must protect participant confidentiality and obtain appropriate consent. Case reports should be presented for legitimate educational or scientific purposes and should avoid unnecessary personal details.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers play an essential role in maintaining the scientific quality and ethical standards of the journal. Reviewers are expected to provide fair, objective, constructive, timely, and confidential evaluations of manuscripts.

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on academic merit, methodological quality, ethical soundness, clarity, originality, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Reviews should be respectful and professional. Personal criticism of authors is not acceptable. Reviewers should provide specific comments that help authors improve their manuscripts.

Reviewers must maintain confidentiality. Manuscripts received for review must not be shared with others, discussed publicly, or used for personal research, teaching, publication, or professional advantage. If a reviewer wishes to consult another expert, they must obtain permission from the journal first.

Reviewers must disclose conflicts of interest and decline the review if impartial evaluation is not possible. Reviewers should also inform the journal if they believe they know the identity of the authors in a double-blind review process and if this knowledge creates a conflict.

Reviewers should alert the editor to any suspected ethical issues, including plagiarism, duplicate publication, data concerns, inappropriate authorship, unethical research procedures, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or citation manipulation. Reviewers should not investigate authors independently or contact them directly.

Reviewers should complete reviews within the requested timeframe. If they are unable to review on time, they should inform the journal promptly so that alternative arrangements can be made.

Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for ensuring the fairness, quality, integrity, and transparency of the editorial process. Editorial decisions should be based on the manuscript’s scholarly merit, relevance to the journal, originality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field.

Editors must treat all submitted manuscripts confidentially. They must not disclose information about a manuscript to anyone other than those involved in the review and publication process. Editors must not use unpublished material from submitted manuscripts for their own research or personal advantage.

Editors should select qualified reviewers who have appropriate expertise and no apparent conflicts of interest. Editors should consider reviewer comments carefully but are responsible for the final decision. Reviewer recommendations are advisory; the final decision must reflect editorial judgment and journal standards.

Editors must ensure that manuscripts are evaluated fairly and without discrimination based on nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, ethnicity, religion, political opinion, personal characteristics, or academic status of the authors. The identity or reputation of authors should not determine editorial decisions.

Editors must respond appropriately to ethical concerns. If allegations of misconduct are raised, editors should examine the evidence carefully, seek clarification from the authors when appropriate, and take suitable action. Editors should not ignore credible concerns about published or submitted work.

Editors should protect the integrity of the scholarly record by issuing corrections, clarifications, expressions of concern, or retractions when necessary. They should also ensure that published notices are linked to the relevant article and are clear to readers.

Peer-Review Ethics

The journal’s peer-review process is designed to improve manuscript quality and ensure that published articles meet scientific and ethical standards. The review process must be conducted with confidentiality, impartiality, and respect.

Because the journal uses a double-blind review system, authors must prepare manuscripts in a way that does not reveal their identity. This may require removing names, affiliations, acknowledgments, self-identifying references, funding details, or institutional information from the anonymized manuscript file. Such information may be added later if the manuscript is accepted.

Authors should not attempt to identify or contact reviewers. Reviewers should not attempt to identify or contact authors. Any communication about the manuscript must take place through the journal’s official editorial system or journal office.

Peer review should not be used to delay competitors, appropriate ideas, promote personal citations, or impose irrelevant theoretical or methodological preferences. Reviewers and editors should focus on whether the manuscript is scientifically valid, ethically sound, and relevant to the journal.

Citation Ethics

Authors must cite relevant and appropriate sources accurately. Citations should acknowledge prior work, support scholarly arguments, and allow readers to locate the sources used. Authors should not cite sources they have not read or misrepresent the content of cited works.

Citation manipulation is unacceptable. Authors should not add unnecessary citations merely to increase citation counts for themselves, colleagues, reviewers, editors, journals, or institutions. Reviewers and editors should not pressure authors to cite irrelevant publications.

Self-citation is acceptable when relevant and justified, but excessive or unnecessary self-citation should be avoided. Authors should ensure that the reference list reflects the actual intellectual foundation of the manuscript.

Use of Artificial Intelligence and Writing Assistance

The journal recognizes that authors may use language editing tools, grammar-checking software, reference managers, statistical software, or artificial intelligence-based writing assistance during manuscript preparation. However, authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical compliance of the submitted manuscript.

Artificial intelligence tools should not be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for the work, approve the final manuscript, or be accountable for research integrity. If AI tools are used in a substantial way, such as for drafting, translation, editing, coding, data analysis, or literature organization, authors should disclose the nature and extent of such use where required by the journal.

Authors must ensure that AI-assisted text does not contain fabricated references, inaccurate claims, plagiarism, misleading statements, or confidential information. Authors should not upload sensitive participant data, confidential clinical material, unpublished manuscripts, or identifiable information into tools that do not guarantee appropriate privacy and data protection.

The use of AI tools does not reduce the responsibility of authors. Authors are accountable for verifying all content, citations, analyses, and conclusions before submission.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

The journal is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record. If errors are identified in a published article, the journal will determine the appropriate corrective action based on the nature and seriousness of the issue.

A correction may be issued when an article contains an error that does not invalidate the main findings or conclusions but requires clarification for readers. Corrections may address errors in data presentation, author information, funding statements, acknowledgments, tables, figures, or textual details.

An expression of concern may be issued when serious questions arise about the integrity or reliability of an article, but the investigation has not yet reached a final conclusion. This notice informs readers that concerns are being examined.

A retraction may be issued when the findings are unreliable due to misconduct or major error, when plagiarism is confirmed, when the article has been published elsewhere without proper disclosure, when data have been fabricated or falsified, when ethical approval or consent was seriously inadequate, or when other major violations of publication ethics are confirmed.

Retraction is not intended to punish authors but to correct the scientific record. Retracted articles may remain accessible online with a clear retraction notice so that the publication history remains transparent.

Handling Allegations of Misconduct

The journal takes allegations of misconduct seriously. Allegations may involve plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, unethical research, authorship disputes, conflicts of interest, reviewer misconduct, editorial misconduct, or other breaches of publication ethics.

When an allegation is received, the editorial team will review the evidence carefully. Authors may be asked to provide explanations, original data, ethical approval documents, consent forms, or other supporting materials. Reviewers, editors, institutions, or other relevant parties may be consulted when necessary.

The journal seeks to handle all allegations fairly and confidentially. Accusations should not be made lightly, and decisions should be based on evidence. If misconduct is confirmed, appropriate action will be taken depending on the severity and stage of publication.

Possible actions include issuing a warning, requesting correction, rejecting the manuscript, notifying authors’ institutions, publishing a correction, issuing an expression of concern, retracting the article, or restricting future submissions from individuals involved in serious misconduct.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions if they believe that a decision was based on a misunderstanding, procedural error, or unfair evaluation. Appeals should be submitted in writing and should provide a clear, respectful, and evidence-based explanation of the grounds for appeal.

An appeal does not guarantee that the decision will be changed. The editorial team may review the manuscript, consult additional reviewers, or ask another editor to evaluate the case. Final decisions after appeal are made by the editor-in-chief or authorized editorial authority.

Complaints about editorial handling, peer review, publication ethics, or journal procedures should be submitted to the journal office. The journal will consider complaints seriously and seek to respond appropriately.

Ethical Oversight and Continuous Improvement

Behavioral and Clinical Studies in Contemporary Psychology recognizes publication ethics as an ongoing responsibility rather than a one-time requirement. The journal is committed to reviewing and improving its editorial policies, peer-review procedures, author guidelines, and ethical standards as scholarly publishing practices evolve.

The journal expects all participants in the publication process to act with integrity, professionalism, and respect. Authors should conduct and report research honestly. Reviewers should provide confidential, fair, and constructive evaluations. Editors should make impartial and accountable decisions. Readers and the academic community should be able to trust that published articles have been evaluated through a responsible and ethical process.

Through these publication ethics policies, the journal seeks to protect research participants, support authors, assist reviewers and editors, preserve the reliability of published literature, and contribute to the advancement of behavioral and clinical psychology.