Double-Blind Peer Review and Evaluation Process

The double-blind peer review process is implemented for the evaluation of articles submitted to our journal. In the double-blind method, the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed. Therefore, authors are requested to remove their name information when uploading their articles to the system. Article evaluation processes are detailed below.

! According to the fee policy, articles for which payment has not been made will not be processed until payment is completed.

Preliminary Evaluation Process

• For articles submitted to our journal, author(s) are required to upload the copyright form (signed), in PDF format. 
• Articles must be uploaded to the DergiPark system in full text, prepared in accordance with the writing rules.
• The articles submitted to our journal are initially reviewed by the editor. At this stage, studies that do not align with the journal's aim and scope, lack originality, and do not comply with publication policies are rejected.
• For the eligible study, the peer review process is initiated. It is shared with 2 referees, each specialized in the relevant field. As "Karadeniz International Scientific Journal" applies the double-blind peer review principle in the evaluation process, referees cannot see the author of the article.

Referee Assignment and Evaluation Process

• Firstly, referees are asked whether they can evaluate the relevant study within a one-week period. Referees who provide a positive response are requested to evaluate the submitted studies based on the specified criteria within 15 days. For studies that are not evaluated during this period, an additional one-week period is granted. If no evaluation is made during this period as well, the referees are changed. The evaluation process is carried out according to the principle of double-blind peer review. Referees cannot directly communicate with authors; evaluation and referee reports are communicated through the journal management system. During this process, evaluation forms and referee reports are conveyed to the author(s) through the editor.
• If the referees provide a positive evaluation, the publication process of the article begins, and it is sent to language editors.
• In the case that one of the referees issues a rejection, a referee recommendation is sought from the Section Editors, and the article is re-evaluated by a third referee. If the third referee also decides on rejection, it is determined that the study is not suitable for publication. In this case, the referee fee is deducted from the payment made for the article, and the remainder is refunded to the author. The article's evaluation process is completed.
• When authors are requested to make corrections about the article by the referees, authors are obliged to make the corrections. However, in exceptional cases, if authors persistently defend their opinion, the article can be accepted for publication with the Editor's positive opinion. In this case, authors need to substantiate their views based on evidence.