Review Principles
1) Papers that have not been previously published or are not currently under review by another journal and approved by each author are accepted for evaluation.
2) Submitted and pre-checked papers are scanned for plagiarism using the iThenticate software.
3) Uludag Journal of Theology conducts a double-blind peer-review process. All submissions are initially evaluated by the editor for compliance with the journal's standards. Approved articles are sent to at least two independent expert referees to evaluate the scientific quality of the paper.
4) The Chief editor evaluates the submitted articles fairly regardless of the authors' ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious belief, or political philosophy and ensures that the articles submitted for publication undergo a fair double-blind peer-review.
5) The Chief editor does not allow conflicts of interest between authors, editors, and reviewers.
6) The editor is responsible for the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of the papers. The editor's decision is final.
7) The editors do not participate in decisions about articles written by them or their family members or colleagues, or that relate to products or services of interest to the editors. Such submissions are subject to the journal's standard procedures.
The reviewers should ensure that all information related to the submitted articles remains confidential until the the article is published, and should report to the editor if they detect any copyright infringement or plagiarism by the author.
If the reviewer does not feel qualified about the subject of the article or if it does not seem possible to provide a timely response, he/she should inform the editor and request to be excluded from the review process.
During the evaluation process, the editor explicitly states that the manuscripts submitted for review are the private property of the authors and that this is a privileged communication. Reviewers and members of the editorial board cannot discuss the manuscripts with other individuals. The anonymity of the reviewers should be preserved.

Review Process
Peer Review Type: Double-Blind Review
Double-Blind Review: After the plagiarism check, eligible papers are evaluated by the chief editor for originality, methodology, the significance of the topic, and compatibility with the journal's scope. The editor ensures that the papers pass through a fair double-blind peer-review process, and if the article complies with the formatting rules, it is submitted for evaluation by at least two referees from domestic and/or foreign sources. After the authors make the necessary revisions, the reviewers approve the article for publication.
Review Time: Pre-Publication
Author-Reviewer Interaction: Editors act as intermediaries for all interactions between reviewers and authors.
Plagiarism Check: Yes - using iThenticate. Uludag Journal of Theology scans articles to prevent plagiarism.
Number of Reviewers for Each Article: Two to three.
Allowed Time for Review: 15 days. This period can be extended by 10 days.
Decision: At least two reviewers must approve the article for the Editor to accept it for publication.
Suspicion of Ethical Violation: When referees suspect research or publication misconduct, they should inform the Editor, who is responsible for carrying out necessary actions in accordance with COPE guidelines.
The Chief Editor reviews the research article on the day it is submitted, and if he/she believes that the article deserves further evaluation, he/she sends it to the Assistant Editor for a more detailed review. The Assistant Editor typically reads each research article from beginning to end. We aim to make initial decisions on all articles within two to three weeks, but the first decision is usually made within a few days of submission. If we do not believe that Uludag Journal of Theology is the right journal for the study, we will promptly notify the authors so they can submit their work elsewhere without delay. At this stage, typical reasons for rejection include insufficient originality and the subject matter being outside the journal's scope.
The next step for your research article is our Editorial Board meeting. Members will read your article and discuss its importance, originality, and scientific quality. We primarily focus on the research question to make editorial decisions for research articles. Even if the topic of the article is relevant to the scope of the journal, current, and important, we may reject it if there is no research question. Of course, the study will be dismissed if there are serious flaws. Everyone attending the article meeting is asked to declare any conflicting interests at the outset. Anyone with significant conflicts of interest will either leave the room or speak last when the relevant article is being discussed, (depending on the nature and scope of their interests).
If your article suits Uludag Journal of Theology, the Assistant Editor will send your article to two external referees. The referees will make recommendations to the editors, who will make the final decision. We require referees to approve their reports and disclose any conflicts of interest they have with the article we send them. The Chief Editor will make the final decision after the external referee evaluation process.
In cases where serious research misconduct is suspected, some articles may be viewed by the ethics Editor of Uludag Journal of Theology and third parties deemed appropriate by the editor
We aim to reach a final decision on all articles within 8 to 12 weeks after they are submitted. If we propose a revision to a publication, we usually ask authors to revise their articles and upload them to the system within the next month.
Uludag Journal of Theology provides open access to articles as part of its commitment to readers and authors. All of our articles are freely accessible online.
If you notice any errors in your published article, please email the Chief Editor to inquire whether corrections can be made.

Principles of the Peer Review Process for Editorial Board's Work
Editorial articles and analysis articles written by the editors of the Uludag Journal of Theology are not subject to external peer review. Original research articles, on the other hand, are sent for blind peer review to at least two external reviewers. During this process, the roles of those editors are suspended.

Responsibilities of the Authors
Authors must comply with research and publication ethics.
Authors should not attempt to publish the same work in multiple journals.
Authors must accurately cite all sources used in the writing of their article.
Authors are responsible for responding to revision and correction requests within the given time frame. Reasonable justifications will be evaluated by the journal team. Late submissions may be deferred to the next issue, and those not returned may be rejected.

Responsibilities of the Editor
The editor evaluates articles based on their scientific content, regardless of the authors' ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs, or political opinions.
The editor conducts a fair double-blind peer review of submitted articles and ensures that all information related to the submitted articles is kept confidential before publication.
The editor informs the reviewers that the articles are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. Reviewers and the editorial board cannot discuss the articles with others. The anonymity of the reviewers should be preserved. In certain situations, the editor may share a reviewer's evaluation with other reviewers to clarify a specific point.
The editor is responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication. It is also his/her responsibility to issue a correction note or implement a withdrawal as necessary.
The editor does not allow any conflicts of interest among authors, editors, and reviewers. They have complete authority in appointing reviewers, and the Editorial Board is responsible for the final decision to publish articles in the journal.

Responsibilities of Reviewers
Reviewers should not have any conflicts of interest with the research, authors, and/or research funding providers.
The evaluations of the referees should be objective.
The language and style used by reviewers should not be offensive to the author.
Reviewers should ensure that all information related to the submitted articles remains confidential until the article is published.
Reviewers should notify the editor if they notice copyright infringement or plagiarism in the work they are reviewing.
A reviewer who feels inadequate to review an article or cannot complete the review within the specified time should withdraw from the review process.
During the review process, reviewers are expected to evaluate the article based on the following: Does the article contain new and important information? / Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the article? / Is the methodology described comprehensively and clearly? / Are the comments and conclusions supported by the findings? / Are there sufficient references to other studies in the field? / Is the language quality adequate?
The "Preliminary Review Form", "Article Evaluation Form" and "Book Review Evaluation Form" used in the Uludag Journal of Theology can be reached through the journal's website.

Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Check
The article is reviewed by assistant editors for compliance with journal publication policies, academic writing rules, and the ISNAD Citation System (Second Edition), and undergoes a plagiarism check using the iThenticate program. Pre-review is completed within a maximum of 20 days. The similarity rate of plagiarism should be less than 15%. Even if the similarity rate is 1%, plagiarism can still occur if citation and quotation rules are not applied carefully. In this regard, citation and quotation rules should be known by the author and carefully applied. "Pre-review form for the article" (Reviewing the form before submitting your article can make the process faster and easier.)

Citation/Indirect Reference: If a thought, discussion, or finding in a source is referred to and the cited view is put into words by the citing researcher, a footnote should be added at the end of the sentence. If the citation is to a specific page or page range of the work, a page number should be provided. If there is a citation for the entire work, meaning that a citation has been made in a size that will require the reader to review the entire work, the source should be listed after the expression "See" or "Refer to" or simply "See".

Quotation: If a portion of the source material is directly taken without any modification, including punctuation, it should be presented in "double quotation marks" and a footnote number should be added to indicate the source. Quotations within a directly quoted text should be denoted by 'single quotation marks'. If the directly quoted section is longer than three lines (more than forty words), it should be presented in a separate paragraph indented from the left margin and in a font size one point smaller than the normal text. This is to differentiate the long quotation from the main text. In the directly quoted text, certain words, sentences, and paragraphs may be omitted as long as the meaning is not altered. The omitted sections should be replaced with three dots (...). It is not acceptable to simply provide the source without using "double quotation marks" to indicate that the text is directly quoted from the source. Failure to comply with these rules may result in accusations of academic misconduct, including plagiarism (see www.isnadsistemi.org).

Domain/ Field Editor Review
The articles submitted to the journal are reviewed by the relevant field editor for their problematic aspects and academic style. This review is completed within 15 days at most.

Peer Review Process (Academic Evaluation)
The paper that passes the review of the field editor and assistant editor is subjected to evaluation by at least two external referees who have a doctoral thesis, book or article related to the subject.
The peer review process is conducted confidentially within the framework of the double-blind review. The referee is requested to express his/her opinion and judgment on the work he/she reviewed either on the text itself or with a justification of at least 150 words on the online referee form. The author is given the right to object and defend his/her views if he/she does not agree with the referee's opinions. The field editor ensures mutual communication between the author and the referee while maintaining confidentiality. If both referee reports are positive, the study is submitted to the Editorial Board with a proposal to evaluate its publication. In case one of the referees expresses a negative opinion, the work is sent to a third referee. The decision to publish the work is made based on the positive opinions of at least two referees. The publication of book and symposium evaluations and doctoral thesis abstracts is decided by the evaluation of at least two internal referees (related assistant editor and book review editor and/or members of the editorial board).
If the referee reports are positive, the article is published. If the Editorial Board does not find the reports received from the referees sufficient and convincing, it may decide to reappoint referees. In case one of the referees gives a negative report, if deemed appropriate by the journal editorial board, the work is sent to a third referee. The decision to publish the article is made based on the third referee's report, and the final decision is made by the journal editorial board. The accepted article is published in the appropriate issue according to the order of publication.
“Journal referee form” (You can review the form before submitting your article, which can make the process quick and easy.)

Proofreading Stage
If the referees request corrections to the reviewed text, the relevant reports are sent to the author, and he/she is asked to make the necessary corrections. The author makes the corrections in the text with the "Track Changes" feature turned on in Word program or highlights the changes in red. The author submits the revised text to the field editor.

Field Editor's Control
The field editor checks whether the author has made the corrections requested in the text.

Referee's Control
The referee requesting correction checks whether the author has made the corrections requested in the text.

Expansion of Abstract and Summary
For research articles whose publication is decided at the end of the peer review process, the author is also requested to provide expanded Turkish and English summaries/abstracts between 750-1000 words.

Turkish Language Check
The studies that pass the peer review process are reviewed by the Turkish Language Editor and Chief Editor, and if necessary, corrections are requested from the author. The control process is completed within 15 days at most.

English Language Check
The works that pass the Turkish language control are reviewed by the English Language Editor and if necessary, corrections are requested from the author. The English language editor's control process is completed within a maximum of 15 days.

Editorial Board Review
Articles that have passed technical, academic, and linguistic reviews are evaluated by the Editorial Board to determine whether they will be published and in which issue they will be included. The Board decides by majority vote, and in case of a tie, the editor's decision is final.
The Publication Committee determines the final order of articles to be published in the relevant issue and category, with the exception of the following order: "1. Research articles 2. Translation/Research note 3. Scientific meeting evaluation 4. Book review 5. Tribute note." No other method of ordering exists, and the order determined by the editorial board is taken as a basis.

Typesetting and Layout Stage
The works approved for publication by the editorial board are typeset and formatted to be made ready for publication, and are sent to the author for review. This stage takes a maximum of 15 days.

Submission of Data to National and International Indexes
Data for the published issue is submitted to the relevant indexes within 15 days.