The Review Reports

Double Anonymized & The Transparent Peer Review

Peer review, which refers to the review of manuscripts by field experts in the field before they are published, became a mainstream practice in the 20th century. Peer review is a necessary practice to evaluate the quality of scientific articles. Eskiyeni decided to publish the reviewer reports, and author responses to these reports, alongside the article to all readers in March 2022. This practice is known as “transparent peer review,” TPR for short. With the TPR, peer the reviewers' reports, the authors' responses, and the editors' decision letters are all published, alongside the article. The TPR implies greater accountability while less opportunity for review fraud, bias, or manipulation of results. As of March 2022, all reviewers were informed that their re-ports will be published alongside the article, without disclosing their identities. This practice will help promote transparency in the peer review process. Thus, the author and readers will be able to see the evaluation process the article went through until it was published. In addition, this practice will inform researchers planning to publish an article for the first time about how the refereeing process works. Eskiyeni operates a two-stage process in the review of submitted manuscripts: the Internal editorial review and the external review process. Immediately after submission, the editor checks the manuscript to check if it fits the journal's purpose and scope and adheres to principles of ethical research and writing standards. Afterward, the editor sends the manuscripts that complies with the journal's publication policy to the assistant editor for editorial review. At this stage, three internal reviewers take charge. The editor selects one of the assistant editors as the first internal reviewer. The assistant editor examines the manuscript for compliance with the journal writing rules and checks the manuscript for plagiarism through Turnitin. During this process, the reviewers' identity is visible to the author and vice versa. The assistant editor determines the other two internal re-viewers from the members of the editorial board based on their field of expertise. Internal reviewers evaluate the manuscript in terms of its subject, method, and results and decide whether it should be sent to external review for detailed evaluation. The external review is double-blind review; that is, the author and the reviewers do not know each other. The section editor selects two external reviewers among researchers who have carried out research on the manuscript’s topic. The reviewers evaluate the article in detail in terms of its subject, method, and results and write their recommendations about whether the paper should be published or not. If both reviewers' reports are positive, the study is accepted for publication with the decision of the editor. Manuscripts can be published with the positive decision of at least two reviewers. The editor rereads the manuscript accepted for publication. It is then submitted to the language editor for English editing. Finally, the peer reviewers’ reports, authors’ responses, and editors’ decision letters are all published, alongside the accepted articles. This process is fully compatible with journals using single or double anonymized review.

Eskiyeni operates a two-stage process in the review of submitted manuscripts: The Internal editorial review and The External review process. Detailed information about the review process used in the journal is given below:

Review Timing: Pre-publication
Number of Reviewers: Three Internal Reviewers (Editorial Review)- Two External Reviewers (Peer Review)
Mediation: Editors mediate all interactions between reviewers and authors
Reviewer interacts with: Editor
Number of days between submission & last decision: Average 70 Days/10 Weeks
Plagiarism checks: Yes – Turnitin

The Peer Review Process
1. The Editor-in-Chief’s review: Immediately after submission, the Editor-in-Chief pre-checks the manuscript to comply with the journal's purpose, scope and adhere to ethical research and writing standards. Afterward, the Editor-in-Chief directs the manuscripts that comply with the journal's publication policy to the Assistant Editor for Editorial (Internal) Review.

2. The Editorial (Internal) Review Process: At this stage, three internal reviewers take charge.
Internal Reviewer 1 (Identity Transparency: All identities visible)
The Editor-in-Chief selects the first internal reviewer from the Assistant Editors. The assistant editor examines the manuscript for compliance with the journal writing rules and scans the article for plagiarism by Turnitin. Reviewer identity is visible to the author; author identity is visible to reviewer, reviewer and author identity is visible to (decision-making) editor.

Internal Reviewers 2 & 3 (Identity Transparency: Double Anonymized)
The Assistant Editor determines the two internal reviewers from the members of the Editorial Board according to their field of expertise. Internal reviewers evaluate the manuscript in terms of its subject, method, and results and decide whether it should be included in the external review process for detailed evaluation. Reviewer identity is not made visible to the author, author identity is not made visible to the reviewer, reviewer, and author identity is visible to (decision-making) editor.

3. The Peer Review (External Review) Process: Two external reviewers take charge at this stage.
External Reviewers 1 & 2 (Identity Transparency: Double Anonymized)
The Section Editor selects two external reviewers from the scholars who have done research on the manuscript topic. If the reviewer who has done research on the manuscript topic cannot be found, the reviewers are determined from among scholars who have a doctorate in that field of science. The reviewers evaluate the article in detail in terms of its subject, method, and results and express their opinions on whether the paper should be published or not. If both reviewers' reports are positive, the study is accepted for publication with the decision of the Editor-in-Chief. If one of the two reviewers has a negative opinion, the study is sent to a third reviewer. Manuscripts can be published with the favorable decision of at least two reviewers. Reviewer identity is not made visible to the author; author identity is not made visible to the reviewer; reviewer and au-thor identity are visible to (decision-making) editor.

Manuscript Preparation for Publication: The Editor-in-Chief rereads the manuscript accepted for publication. It is then submitted to the Language Editor for English Editing. The author is requested to revise the text in line with the demands of the Editor-in-Chief and Language Editor. The revised text is sent to the typesetting by the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief plans the issue in which the typed manuscript will be published.

The Review Reports' Publication (Transparent Peer Review): Peer reviews are published but not signed. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/eskiyeni/page/13397

Post-publication Commenting: Published articles are promoted on social media platforms, and comments made by platform users are followed.

Ethical Violation Complaints: Ethical complaints regarding the published articles are followed via the eskiyenidergi@gmail.com e-mail account.