Review Process
The author(s) submitting a manuscript to the Turkish Journal of Remote Sensing (TJRS) are deemed to accept the ethical responsibilities defined by Ethical Principles and Publication Policy. Each author is responsible for the content of their work.
All manuscripts submitted to the Turkish Journal of Remote Sensing (TJRS) are screened prior to peer review using recognized plagiarism detection software such as Turnitin, iThenticate, and/or intihal.net. If the similarity rate exceeds 25% due to plagiarism or self-plagiarism, the manuscript is returned to the authors for proper citation and revision.
The article evaluation process consists of the following stages:
1. Initial Evaluation
After submission, the manuscript undergoes a preliminary assessment by the editorial office.
At this stage, the following aspects are evaluated:
- Compliance with the journal’s aims and scope
- Adherence to author guidelines
- Plagiarism/similarity check
Based on this evaluation, the manuscript may be:
- Rejected directly, or
- Sent to the peer review process
Manuscripts that are out of scope or do not meet basic requirements are returned to the authors.
2. Peer Review Process (Double-Blind Review)
TJRS adopts a double-blind peer review system, where both the reviewers and authors remain anonymous.
Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. Reviewers assess:
- Scientific quality
- Methodology
- Results and discussion
- Originality and contribution
Reviewers provide recommendations as:
- Accept
- Minor revision
- Major revision
- Reject
If revision is required, authors are requested to submit a revised version within the specified timeframe along with a detailed response to reviewer comments.
In cases where reviewer opinions differ significantly, the editor may, when deemed necessary, assign an additional reviewer to ensure a balanced and fair evaluation. The editor may also conduct an independent assessment to support the decision-making process.
3. Editorial Evaluation of Reviewer Reports
The editorial team carefully examines the reviewer reports.
Based on these reports, the editors may:
- Accept the manuscript
- Request revisions
- Reject the manuscript
4. Evaluation of Revised Manuscripts
Revised manuscripts submitted by the authors are re-evaluated by the editors and, if necessary, sent back to the reviewers.
Authors may be requested to revise their manuscripts more than once. Revised submissions may undergo multiple rounds of evaluation, and additional revisions may be requested when necessary.
5. Final Decision
The final decision regarding the manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief, taking into account reviewer reports and revisions.
Authors are notified of the decision. Rejected manuscripts are accompanied by a reasoned explanation.
6. Production and Pre-Press Process
Accepted manuscripts proceed to the production stage.
At this stage:
- Language editing and proofreading are performed
- Formatting and layout adjustments are completed
Authors are required to review and approve the final proof before publication.
7. Publication
After final approval, articles are published online.
All articles are published as open access and are freely available to readers.
Editorial Conflict of Interest
For manuscripts in which an editor, associate editor, or editorial board member is listed as an author:
- The manuscript is assigned to a different and independent editor or field editor to ensure an impartial evaluation process.
- The editor or field editor who is an author of the manuscript is completely excluded from all stages of the editorial and peer review process.
- The double-blind peer review process is strictly maintained for such submissions.
- All editorial decisions are made independently by the assigned editor, in accordance with standard review procedures.