ARTICLE EVALUATION PROCESS
The double blind review method is adopted for the evaluation of articles. By using this method, the author and the referees who review their work do not know each other’s identities.
The articles that are sent to the journal for publishing are evaluated by the editor in chief and the field (subject) editor for the following criteria: An article is evaluated by considering the following criteria:
· Its compatibility with the scope and field of the journal
· Evaluation of similarity rate
· Its compatibility with the scientific rules of the journal
· Its language (abstract, sufficiency of keywords, structured abstract translation etc.),
After the initial review by the Editorial Board, 2 original and 1 alternate referees are designated for the scientific evaluation in accordance with the subject and content of the article.
The abstract of the article is submitted to the referees. The referees must a give notice in 7 days as to whether they have accepted the article for evaluation. If the referee accepts the article for evaluating, they are sent the full text file. The maximum time period which a referee has in order to evaluate an article is one month. The referees evaluate the article by using the standard evaluation form they have received. Moreover, the referees may submit their notes of suggestions and opinions on the full text to the Editorial Board if they wish to do so.
The referees can give one of the 4 different feedback options.
· Can be published as is.
· Can be published after making suggested corrections (the referees or the Editorial Board decides on whether necessary corrections have been made).
· Cannot be published without making suggested corrections (after its return from the author(s), the study is reviewed for a second time).
· Cannot be published.
If the referees request corrections to be made, the article is sent back to the author(s) for editing. The author(s) need to finish editing within a period of one month. When authors submit their revised papers, they should attach a reports that have to includes the list of revisions and their responses to the reviewers. The corrections made by the author(s) are submitted to the referees for another article evaluation for a period of 15 days. Depending on this referee evaluation, the article may be sent again to the author(s) for corrections, can be published with Editorial Board decision or rejected. If the referees or Editorial Board give the article a report of ‘not publishable’, then the author(s) is notified regarding this result.
Based on referee opinions, the study can be assigned with a third or fourth referee and the process follows the same steps. After the evaluation process, the Editorial Board goes over the referee feedback within two weeks.
The author(s), whose work has been approved for publication, are required to submit an extended abstract written in English between 1500-1800 words covering all the chapters of the work (introduction, method, findings and conclusion) in general. The extended abstracts of the submitted articles are sent to the Foreign Language Editor for their inspection and evaluation. The author(s) are required to make necessary correction in accordance with the Foreign Language Editor’s opinions. The study cannot be published unless the requested changes are made.
The referee feedbacks are advisory to the Editors and Field Editors in making the Final Decision regarding a study. The final decision is always made by Editors and Field Editors. With the help of the feedback provided by the referees, Editors and Field Editors make the final decision and notify the author(s) of the study regarding the results.