Review Process
- Uploading the manuscript: The manuscript should be uploaded by the “corresponding author” to the web page of the journal (https://dergipark.org.tr/jopem) via following the rules of journal. After the manuscript is uploaded, a related message is sent to the author/authors in 24 hours, which is about the successful transmission.
- Editorial evaluation: The editor and / or editor assistants send the manuscript to the related field editors, depending on the content of topic. If the manuscript does not comply with the field of journal, it may be rejected without being sent to the field editors. The field editors evaluate the importance of writing in terms of relevance, being up to date, content, formal control, as well as academic plagiarism. Field editors may reject the manuscript without sending it to the referees if they think that the manuscripts is not complied with the rules of journal. The rejected writings are not taken into consideration again.
- Invitation to Referee: The evaluation of the manuscript which is deemed appropriate by the field editors to be evaluated shall be initiated by an invitation letter. The “invitation letters for evaluation” are sent the at least two field editors. In the text of invitation letter, the tittle of manuscripts, abstract, keywords and JEL codes are all included to be sent. As the blind review system is applied, any statement describing the authors in the manuscript can’t exist. The given period on accepting or not accepting the “invitation for evaluation” is only one week for each referee candidate. The field editor can extend this period due to various reasons. The “invitation letter for evaluation” can be replied with acceptance or rejection by the referee candidate, in the framework on review for the closeness to their fields of expertise, the positive or negative sense of contests about the author/authors or depending on their workload. If some of the referees didn’t accept the invitation for evaluation, a new referee could be determined.
- The evaluation of referee: The referees evaluate the submitted manuscripts and do so within the framework of relevance to the field, materiality, purpose, methodology, literature search, evaluation of the results, and overlap of the results achieved. The referees give points for the sent manuscript in the framework of the items referred in “evaluation form”. The period for evaluation is two weeks. The period can be extended by the field editors because of various reasons. For the manuscript, four answers can be given in line with the suggestions from the referees within two weeks, indeed, those responses are stated as the decisions, i.e., “full acceptance/ minor correction (the review of the editor will be sufficient)/ comprehensive correction (the reevaluation of referees will be needed)/ rejection”. The field editor can send the manuscript to a different third referee, in case there exists a difference in the evaluations coming from referees. If there needed a comprehensive correction and a demand on reevaluation, the manuscript would be requested to be corrected by the field editor from author/authors in line with the views of referees. The period for correction by author/authors can be determined as one week to one months whether the correction will be comprehensive or not. The manuscript which was edited and reloaded to the system by the author/authors is sent to the referee/referees who demanded the will of reevaluation. This process continues until it is accepted by referee/referees. In this course of time, the author/authors can withdraw the manuscript in the framework of their own will. If the referees gave a decision in the forms of “little correction (the review of field editor will be sufficient)”, the field editors would want the author/authors to correct this manuscript. The field editors give a period of one month for this change, and the manuscript for which the correction was demanded is uploaded by author/authors. The field editors make the decision about whether those changes were performed or not. The thank-you note (the title, abstract, key words and evaluation dates of the manuscripts which was evaluated will exist in the text) will be sent to the referees by the field editors, because of their contributions.
- Publication decision: In the framework of the positive opinion given by the field editors and approval granted by the referees, the editorial board may accept the manuscript for publication. The editorial board might not accept the manuscript for publication even if it received the positive opinion of referee and field editors. The editorial board give a decision about which issue would be convenient for publication.
- Adaptation of publication to journal format: For the string of manuscript, which was accepted, the manuscript will be sent to the author by compilers in order that the journal will be prepared as to the accepted format. A period of one month is given for author/authors will be given as they can adapt manuscript to the format. The compilers want the author/ authors to sign “the Copyright Agreement”, scan at first, and then send the version with wet-signature to the journal via postal service. The manuscript which adapted to the demanded format and reloaded to the system is reevaluated by the compilers and prepared for publication in the issue to be pressed by the editorial board.
- Publication: The related manuscript which was prepared for publication is finally published online on the date of the related issue. The open access web address of the published article is sent to the author / authors.
The author(s) is (are) the sole responsible for the opinion and views stated in the articles.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.