PEER REVIEW PROCESS
All manuscripts submitted to GSI Journals Serie A: Advancements in Tourism Recreation and Sports Sciences (ATRSS) undergo a multi-stage double-blind peer review process to ensure scientific quality, ethical compliance, and publication integrity. The evaluation process is conducted in accordance with the stages outlined below.
1. Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscripts via the journal’s online submission system (DergiPark). By submitting a manuscript, authors declare that the work is original, has not been previously published, and is not under consideration elsewhere. Authors are responsible for complying with the journal’s Publication Ethics and Writing Rules.
2. Technical and Formal Pre-Check by the Secretariat
Submitted manuscripts are first reviewed by the journal secretariat for technical and formal compliance. The following elements are checked:
• Completeness of files and required documents (ethical statements, copyright forms, etc.)
• Compliance with the journal’s writing rules and manuscript template
• Total word count does not exceed the maximum limit defined by the journal
• Abstract complies with the specified word limit
• For manuscripts written in Turkish, the presence of an extended English abstract prepared within the specified word limits
Manuscripts that do not meet formatting or word limit requirements are returned to the authors without entering the peer review process.
3. Similarity (Plagiarism) Screening
All manuscripts that pass the technical pre-check are screened for similarity using the automatically generated similarity report provided by the DergiPark submission system. This report is produced during submission via the https://intihal.net/ infrastructure and constitutes the sole basis for similarity assessment.
Similarity reports uploaded or submitted by authors are not considered.
Similarity evaluation is conducted according to the following criteria:
• Similarity with any single source must not exceed 1%.
• Manuscripts with an overall similarity rate exceeding 20% are not considered for review.
For manuscripts derived from theses, similarity screening is conducted before the findings/results section of the thesis is reflected in the manuscript text. Thesis-based content must be ethically restructured in accordance with publication standards.
Manuscripts exceeding acceptable similarity thresholds or containing ethical violations are not forwarded to the peer review stage.
4. Editorial Pre-Evaluation
Manuscripts that pass similarity screening are evaluated by the editor or associate editors in terms of journal scope, subject relevance, and basic scientific adequacy. Manuscripts that fall outside the scope of the journal or contain evident ethical concerns may be rejected at this stage.
5. Assignment of Section Editor
Manuscripts passing the editorial pre-evaluation are assigned to a section editor based on subject matter and expertise. The section editor oversees the scientific coordination of the review process.
6. Reviewer Assignment
The section editor appoints at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. The review process is conducted under a double-blind principle; identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential. Reviewers are given a defined period to submit their reports; non-responsive reviewers may be replaced.
7. Double-Blind Peer Review
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript in terms of originality, methodology, scientific contribution, writing quality, and ethical compliance. Reviewer reports are submitted electronically and communicated to authors anonymously.
8. Evaluation of Reviewer Reports
Based on reviewer reports, the section editor issues one of the following decisions:
• Accept
• Revision required
• Additional review required
• Reject
In cases of substantially conflicting reviewer opinions, additional evaluation procedures may be initiated.
9. Author Revisions and Author Response Form
For manuscripts requiring revision, authors submit their responses to reviewer and editor comments using the Author Response Form, clearly indicating all changes made or providing justified explanations for changes not made.
10. Final Editorial Evaluation
After revisions are completed, the manuscript undergoes a final evaluation by the section editor, considering reviewer reports, author responses, and overall scientific and ethical compliance.
11. Ethical Oversight and Process Integrity
All stages of the evaluation process are conducted in accordance with the journal’s Publication Ethics and Editorial Policies. Ethical violations, conflicts of interest, or procedural irregularities identified at any stage are addressed at the editorial level; the review process may be suspended, restructured, or terminated if necessary.
12. Pre-Publication Preparation
Manuscripts accepted for publication undergo language editing, formatting, and typesetting. After DOI assignment and issue scheduling, the manuscript is published.