GENERAL PRINCIPLES

We ask and request that the reviewers pay attention to the following issues before making your evaluation:
-When you agree to review, you accept the following ethical responsibilities.
-You are required to submit your evaluation via the system both in structured questions and in a free text box separately for the author and the editor. The author cannot see the opinions and comments you write in the editor-specific section. For this reason, you can express your positive or negative opinions about the article in this section.
-If you have a conflict of interest regarding the article, please contact the editor as soon as possible.
-If you cannot complete your evaluation within the specified time, you can contact the editor and request additional time. In this way, the author can be provided with transparent information about the process.

ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES

-It is an ethical responsibility for reviewers to protect the confidentiality of manuscripts. For this reason, care should be taken not to involve third parties in the evaluation and to protect the confidentiality of article files and referee reports. It is recommended that unpublished manuscript files be destroyed/deleted from the computer after the evaluation is completed.
-Reviewers should adopt a constructive and evidence-based approach in their reports.
-Please refrain from making statements in the reviewer’s reports that are damaging to the career and personality of anyone.

EVALUATION

History Studies wishes to ensure that published articles make an original contribution to international literature and comply with academic and ethical standards. The main criteria that our reviewers should pay attention to in this direction are as follows:
1. The contribution of the article to the literature should be clear and original. It should be evaluated whether a topic that has not been addressed before or whether a new perspective on the subject is presented even if it has been addressed before, especially whether the research question is clearly stated and whether the contribution to the literature is important and whether the research question put forward in the introduction of the study is answered as a result of the study.
2. The appropriateness, soundness and accuracy of the research method used for the purpose of the article should be reviewed. It is important that the method, whether quantitative or qualitative, has been applied with academic integrity.
3. The author should be able to situate the article within the existing literature and clearly define the theoretical concepts used. Reviewers should assess whether the literature used in the article is current and accurate.
4. The conformity of the article to the academic writing language, fluency and terminological accuracy should be reviewed. It should also be checked whether the logical flow of the article is provided and whether the arguments are presented consistently.
5. The article must comply with the rules of academic ethics and the references must be cited correctly and adequately. All references must be properly cited and based on appropriate literature where necessary.
6. Reviewers should not hesitate to recommend rejection while evaluating the article objectively. Taking a clear stance on manuscripts that are not suitable for publication is of great importance for maintaining the academic quality of History Studies.

We ask our reviewers to protect the academic quality of History Studies by evaluating them in accordance with these criteria.

We sincerely thank you for your contributions.

For technical support, please click on the contact page