Evaluation Process:

1. In order for the studies submitted to our journal to be evaluated by the referees, pre-checks are provided by the editorial board. At this stage, firstly, the relevant editorial board member evaluates the work in terms of writing and publication rules, ethical principles, and compliance with the journal's purpose and scope. In this first stage, where formal controls are provided, studies that do not have any deficiencies/problems in terms of content and style are then evaluated by the relevant field editor.

2. The evaluation process is not initiated for studies that are found to not comply with the publication and spelling rules and these studies are rejected regardless of their content.

3. The field editor examines the work in terms of content and structure and decides whether the study is suitable for peer review. This decision is notified to the author (s) with the report prepared by the field editor within the framework of the Editorial Board Article Pre-Evaluation Form. In this process, the relevant editorial board member has the right to correct or refuse to work. The period given to the author (s) for the works for which the editor gives corrections is 15 days. During this recognized period, the author (s) are expected to make the requested corrections meticulously and resubmit the work through the panel. Studies that are not sent in a corrected form within the specified period are rejected without being taken into the referee evaluation process. Studies, whose form and content are controlled by the editorial board, are evaluated by the referee if deemed appropriate.

4. In the first stage, two referees are appointed in accordance with the "double-blind peer review" system for the works deemed suitable for the referee evaluation. If deemed necessary, a third referee may also be appointed to the studies evaluated.

5. In order for the studies evaluated to be published in our journal, a "publishable" report of at least two referees is required. Similarly, if at least two referees give a "can not be published" report for the studies evaluated, the study is rejected.

6. The publication of the reviewed studies in our journal depends on the approval of the editorial board and referees. Therefore, the author (s) are obliged to make corrections suggested by the editorial board and referees. The period given to the author (s) for each correction proposed by the editorial board and referees is 15 days. Studies that are not sent as corrected within the specified period are removed from the list of the issues to be published.

7. Care is taken to ensure that the author (s) and referees of the studies evaluated are from different institutions. In addition, referees are appointed according to the title status of the author (s). In accordance with our fair evaluation policy, care is taken to ensure that the referees have a title that is hierarchically equal to or higher than the author (s). Referees are assigned in accordance with the field and content of the submitted work and the referee pool is updated for each number

Peer-Review Process:

1. Middle East Studies employs a double-blind refereeing system. Double-blind refereeing is a method concerning the publishing of scientific publications in high quality within ethical standards. This method is the basis of an objective evaluation process of scientific studies and is preferred by many scientific journals.

2. Articles submitted to the MES are reviewed first by the Editorial Board in terms of compliance with the journal's principles and then sent to two approved referees. If deemed necessary, articles may be sent to a third referee approved by the editor.

3. In accordance with the double-blinding method, the identities of the authors and referees are kept secret. The editorial board decides on the publication of the articles.