ARTICLE EVALUATION PROCESS
Evaluation Principles
1. Articles that have not been previously published or are not currently under evaluation for publication in another journal and have been approved by each author will be accepted for evaluation.
2. Submitted articles will be screened for plagiarism using the intihal.net software.
3. Our journal employs a double-blind peer review process. All submissions will first be assessed by the editor for suitability for the journal. Articles deemed suitable will be sent to at least two independent expert reviewers to evaluate the scientific quality of the article. This ensures that articles submitted for publication undergo a fair double-blind peer review process.
4. All published articles are assigned a DOI as a permanent article identifier.
5. Articles published in this journal are digitally archived in LOCKSS. The LOCKSS system has permission to collect, preserve, and serve this Access Archive.
6. It takes an average of 130 days from submission to publication. Editorial Review (10 days), Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Scan (15 days), Revision (10 days), Editorial Board Review (20 days), Double-Blind Peer Review Process (Two Reviewers - 40 days), Revision (10 days), Editorial Review (10 Days), English Language Review (15 Days).
1. Preliminary Review and Editorial Assessment
The Chief Editor conducts a preliminary assessment of the article in terms of the journal's scope, academic content, methodological soundness, and compliance with ethical standards. At this stage:
• Editors evaluate the article for compliance with journal publication principles, academic writing rules, and the ISNAD 2 Citation System.
• The text undergoes a plagiarism check. Articles with a similarity report below 15% proceed to the referee evaluation stage.
• An initial assessment is made regarding content, methodology, and innovation.
• The preliminary review stage is usually completed within 15 days.
2. Field Editor Review
• Studies that pass the preliminary review and plagiarism screening stage are reviewed by the relevant field editor for problematic content and academic language and style.
• The field editor initiates the peer review process.
• The field editor facilitates mutual communication between the author and reviewers while maintaining confidentiality.
• This review is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
3. Referee Evaluation Process
Our journal adopts a double-blind peer review process. This process consists of the following stages:
• The work is sent to at least two independent external referees.
• Care is taken to ensure that the referees have a doctoral thesis, book or article related to the subject.
• The referees evaluate the work in terms of its scientific content, methodology, use of sources, and academic contribution.
• The referee is requested to either indicate their opinion and views on the work they have reviewed in the text or justify them with an explanation of at least 150 words on the online referee form. The author is given the right to object and defend their views if they disagree with the referee's opinions.
• If one of the referees gives a negative opinion, the work is sent to a third referee.
• When two positive referee opinions are received, the article is submitted to the editorial board for evaluation for publication.
• Works can be published with the positive decision of at least two referees.
• Translated articles are sent to language and field experts to be evaluated in terms of their accuracy to the original, the appropriate use of field concepts, and language. Translations that receive a negative opinion from the experts are not published.
• The decision to publish book and symposium reviews and doctoral thesis abstracts is made based on the evaluation of the relevant field editors.
• The basic criteria considered by the referees during the evaluation process are as follows:
o Does the work provide a new and important scientific contribution?
o Do the abstract and introduction clearly and consistently explain the content?
o Are the methods used scientifically adequate and understandable?
o Are the results interpreted logically based on the findings?
o Is the literature review adequate?
o Are the language and presentation in line with academic writing rules?
• The peer review process takes an average of 40 days. This period may be extended if necessary.
4. Revision Stage
• If the reviewers request revisions to the text they have reviewed, the relevant reports are sent to the author and they are asked to revise their work.
• The revisions must be completed within a maximum of 10 days.
• The author submits their revisions to the field editor, indicating them in red.
5. Field Editor Review
The field editor checks whether the author has made the requested corrections to the text. The review process is completed within a maximum of 5 days.
6. Reviewer Review
• The reviewer requesting revisions checks whether the author has made the requested corrections to the text.
• The review process is completed within a maximum of 7 days.
7. Final Review and Preparation for Publication
After the peer review and revision process is complete, the article undergoes the following stages:
• Language and Form Check: The work is reviewed by language editors in terms of Turkish and English.
• Turkish Language Check: Manuscripts that have passed the peer review process are reviewed by the Turkish Language Editor, and corrections are requested from the author if necessary. The review process is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
• English Language Check: Manuscripts that have passed the Turkish language check are reviewed by the English Language Editor, and corrections are requested from the author if necessary. The review process is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
• Arabic Language Review: Manuscripts that pass the English language review are examined by the Arabic Language Editor, and corrections are requested from the author if necessary. The review process is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
• Editorial Board Approval: Articles that have passed technical, academic, and linguistic reviews are examined by the Editorial Board, and a final decision is made regarding their publication status. If any members raise objections, the Board makes a decision by majority vote.
• Typesetting and Layout: The typesetting and layout of works approved for publication by the Editorial Board are completed to prepare them for publication. The draft prepared for publication is reviewed one last time by the author.
• Indexing and Archiving: Printed copies of the published issue are sent to reference libraries in Turkey and abroad within 60 days at the latest; article metadata is sent to the relevant indexes within 15 days.
• The editor is responsible for the order of publication of articles in the journal.
Translated Articles
• TAHKİK only accepts translations of articles for evaluation if the Editorial Board believes they will make a significant contribution to the field after review. The Editorial Board has the authority to reject other translated articles.
• Translated articles are sent to two referees. The referees evaluate the article in terms of the accuracy of the translation, grammar, and contribution to the field.
• If the referees indicate that the article will be published after the suggested corrections have been made, the article is sent to the author for final checks and corrections.
• The article is prepared for publication by undergoing a process of correction and editing.