Referee Evaluation Policy and Process
Kilitbahir Journal operates a two-stage process for evaluating submitted articles, consisting of editorial pre-review (internal evaluation) and external referee evaluation.

Editorial Pre-Review (Internal Evaluation)

After submission, the journal's chief editor, assistant editors, and subject editors review the article for compliance with the journal's purpose and scope, adherence to accepted standards of scientific research writing, and ethical guidelines. (The referee guidelines can be accessed here). In addition to these criteria, the journal editor screens the article for plagiarism using the iThenticate application. If the similarity rate is higher than 20% and there are exact matches, these are marked on the ‘preliminary review copy’ of the article. Articles that pass this initial review are forwarded to the appropriate field editors. Field editors evaluate the article in terms of its subject matter, methodology, contribution to the field, and sources, and complete the preliminary review by noting any issues such as form and conditions, spelling and grammar errors, and the flow of the text. The article is returned to the author for corrections based on the comments made during the initial review process. Once the author has completed the preliminary review corrections, the article proceeds to the external review stage.

External Review
In the external review process, the editor of the relevant field selects two reviewers from among expert researchers whose work is similar to the subject and methodology of the article. If no experts with work directly related to the subject of the article can be found, experts with similar work in terms of subject/methodology or, if the subject of the article is interdisciplinary, experts from relevant fields with at least a doctoral degree are selected as reviewers. The reviewers evaluate the article in detail in terms of its subject, methodology, and results and express their opinions on whether it should be published or not. (If the first two reviewers do not provide a detailed evaluation and sufficient contribution to the scientific content of the article, the article may be sent to the 3rd and 4th reviewers for evaluation to ensure that this contribution is provided. The contributions of the reviewers to the scientific content of the article are taken into consideration.) Articles that receive two positive (accept and minor) results from the review process are accepted for publication by the editor and the editorial board after the necessary revisions are made. If one of the two reviewers expresses a negative opinion, the work is sent to a third reviewer. If a major revision decision is made during the peer review process, the revised manuscript is reviewed by the editor and the field editor after the revisions are completed and then sent back to the relevant reviewers. Regardless of whether they undergo a second round of evaluation, studies can be published with the positive (acceptance) decision of at least two reviewers. (If deemed necessary, the Kilitbahir Editor and Publication Board has the right to make the final decision without consulting a third reviewer).

Language Control, Editing and Final Revision

The work accepted for publication is first sent to the language editor and then to the layout editor. After both revisions, the article is returned to the author for final reading and pre-publication approval. Following the final reading, the article is checked by the editor and field editor and becomes ready for assignment to an issue.