Review Policy

Initial Manuscript Evaluation 

 

Initial manuscript evaluation is important due to checking the unethical contents, fulfilling the publication standard, and reducing workload of potential reviewers. The Editor makes first evaluation of all manuscripts submitting to the journal whether they are original, have unethical contents, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are coherent with the aims and scope of the journal. In this step Editor cannot accept a submission to be published even though it seems exceptional manuscript before start of double-blind peer-review.

This is also a serious step and requires big responsibility. For that, the journal uses the plagiarism checkers (Turnitin® or Ithenticate®) to check similarity rates, plagiarism, and other unethical matters. Editor may request advice from the Editorial Board Members in this step.

Through these processes, the unsuitable manuscripts are rejected before next step.

 

Peer Review Process

 

The journal uses the double-blind peer-review means that both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process. Editor checks whether the all parts of manuscript (including footnotes, acknowledgements, and references) have any information that could identify the author/s before sending it to the referees. All submitting manuscripts are assigned to a code and double-blind peer-review process. The reviewers will make recommendations about worthiness for publication and make suggestions for some changes in need of improvement. The authors will be sent the reviewers’ recommendations anonymously.

The Editor manages the review process according to scientific publication standard. The Editor asks the referees to send their recommendations about worthiness for publication and to make suggestions for some changes in need of improvement. The Editor seeks further referee opinion as the referee’s reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed. Decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on referee’s report. The Editor may also request advice from the members of editorial board on the basis of their expertise. Based on the referee reports, the Editor send decision to the author/s with recommendations made by the referees. If additional advice is needed, Editor may ask the referees to check the revised version of the manuscript. Also the revised version of manuscript is sent to the referees who want to check whether it is ready to be published after the revision.  This cycle is continued until the manuscript has the robust scientific criteria.

 

How the Referee is Selected 

 

The journal select referees who have at least Ph.D. degree and are matched to the paper according to their expertise. The referees database is constantly being updated. Editor may also designate Editorial Board Members to take over the position of the referee thorough  the double-blind process.

 

Referee Reports 

 

Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscripts are original, have unethical contents, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are coherent with the aims and scope of the journal. To give advices and to report views, the referees are also required to fill the Review Form including the sections of abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, others and, notes for the editor.

 

Final Decision

 

Final decision is under the responsibility of Editor. A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author/s according to the recommendations made by the referees.