Journal of Current Marketing Approaches and Research uses double-blind evaluation method, which means that the identities of both the referee and the author are hidden from each other during the evaluation process of all studies. All studies submitted to the Journal of Current Marketing Approaches and Research are evaluated by double-blind analysis according to the steps below.

1. Initial Evaluation Process

Studies submitted to the Journal of Current Marketing Approaches and Research are first reviewed by the secretary. Check whether the uploaded files are suitable. Then, if there are any deficiencies, the author is asked to complete it. The waiting period for the first evaluation is 3 days.

2. Spelling and Language assessment

In this process, the article deemed appropriate by the journal secretary is first sent to the editorial board. Studies deemed appropriate by the editorial board are directed to the spelling, language and statistics editor. The spelling and language editor rejects studies that do not comply with the publication policy of the journal, are weak in terms of language, have no original value, and do not comply with the purpose and scope of our journal. Studies deemed appropriate are sent to the statistics editor. The statistics editor examines the methods and materials used in the study. Examines whether the findings are correct according to the statistical rules. If there are deficiencies, it is sent to the author again for correction. If there is no deficiency, the Editor is appointed. The waiting period for spelling, language and statistical evaluation is at most 10 days.

3. Editorial review

After the manuscripts sent to our journal pass through the spelling, language and statistical evaluation process, an editor is appointed. The editor's waiting period for evaluation is a maximum of 10 days. The contents of the studies deemed appropriate are sent to two referees who have completed at least a PhD who have worked on the relevant topics of marketing. The referees are obliged to ensure that they will not share any process or document related to the work they are evaluating.

4. Referee Review Process

The time given to the referee for the evaluation process is 15 days. The study is accepted as a result of the positive opinion of two of the referees. If two of the referees reject it, the work is returned. If one of the referees rejects the other, it is sent to the third referee. According to the answer received, the decision is made by considering whether the majority is accepted or rejected. The editor may reject the work regardless of the referee's opinions in case of any ethical violation, poor referee evaluation, and non-compliance with the authors' professional ethics. Correction suggestions from reviewers or editors must be completed by the authors within 15 days for the "revision process". Studies can be sent back to the referees in line with the editor's opinion. The referees should review the corrections and send the work to the editor. Editors and referees may request revisions if they wish. Peer-reviews are generally based on the originality of the studies, the method used, their compliance with ethical rules, the consistent presentation of findings and results, the language of writing, and the diversity of the literature.

5. Layout

Accepted studies are arranged according to the journal writing rules and format requirements, and doi assignments are made. The waiting period for this is a maximum of 10 days.



6. Release Process

Studies deemed suitable for publication in the journal give an opinion on the volume and number of publications by the editorial board. The author is informed in which volume and number of publications his work will be published. The waiting period for this is at most 5 days.