Peer Review Process
- Articles uploaded to the JMRFE Journal system are first evaluated by the editors in terms of compliance with writing and publication principles. As a result of the evaluation, if there are corrections to be made by the author, the article is returned to the author by requesting correction by the editors.
- Articles that do not comply with the journal's writing principles will not be sent to the referee.
- Articles found suitable for evaluation in terms of writing and publication principles are sent to at least 2 reviewers for evaluation.
- Reviewer and author names are kept mutually confidential with the Blind Review Application.
- The evaluation period of the reviewers for the article sent to them is maximum 30 days. A new reviewer is appointed for works not reported at the end of this period.
- As a result of the evaluation, the article that receives two positive reviewer reports is entitled to be published. The article, which receives a positive and negative referee report, is sent to a third referee and whether the article is published or not is determined in accordance with the report of the third reviewer.
- Reviewers may want to see the article they want to revise once again before it is published. If this request is specified in the report, the corrected form of the text is automatically sent to the referee by the system.
- The authors can object to the reviewer report within a reasonable framework and with convincing data. The objections are reviewed by the journal management and, if deemed appropriate, the opinion of a different referee (or referees) can be consulted on the subject.
- Articles that negatively complete the reviewer evaluation process are returned to the author with justifications.
- Articles that successfully complete the reviewer evaluation process are sent to the relevant unit for layout.
