- ULUM Journal of Religious Inquiries is a peer-reviewed journal that is indebted to the hundreds of experts who donate their time to critically appraise articles submitted for publication consideration. Peer-reviewed articles are considered highly credible because they have undergone scrutiny by experts with particular knowledge in the topic. Peer review is critical in the editorial process because editors do not have the time or expertise to evaluate all aspects of each submission. The primary aims of peer review are 2-fold: to decide whether or not an article should be published (based on quality and relevance to the journal), and to improve the article before publication.
- Submissions to ULUM should be original articles evaluating previous studies in the field and should produce new and worthwhile ideas and perspectives.
- An article to be published in ULUM should not have been previously published or accepted for publication elsewhere. Papers presented at a conference or symposium may be accepted for publication if this is clearly indicated.
- ULUM uses double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are hidden from each other, throughout the review process. The authors and reviewers are responsible to show their efforts to conceal the identities from being known to each other. This involves the authors, and reviewers (who upload documents as part of their review) checking to see if the following steps have been taken with regard to the text and the file properties: The authors of the document have deleted their names from the text, with "Author" and year used in the references and footnotes, instead of the authors' name, article title, etc. With Microsoft Office documents, author identification should also be removed from the properties for the file.
- Pre-refereeing stage: Upon receiving a new manuscript, the Editorial office conducts initial pre-refereeing checks to ensure the article is legible, complete, correctly formatted, original, within the scope of the journal in question, in the style of a scientific article and written in clear English. Any article that has problems with any of the journal criteria may be rejected at this stage.
- Submission is typically sent to three reviewers for evaluation. Then, Section Editor works with three reports, and submit a unified report to the author(s). An article, in order to be accepted to the journal, must take a positive evaluation from two referees. When necessary, the third referee or the advisory committee may be asked to contribute to the evaluation process. Reviewers play a central role in scholarly publishing. External peer review helps validate research, establish a method by which it can be evaluated, and increase networking possibilities within research communities. Despite criticisms, peer review is still the only widely accepted method for research validation.
- All submissions first go through an internal peer review process, and most go through an external peer-review process. Each submission is reviewed by the assigned editor who makes an initial decision to send the manuscript out for peer review or to reject without external review. Articles can be rejected at this stage for a variety of reasons such as similarity with a recently published article, the topic is outside of the scope of the Journal, little new information is provided, important flaws in the scientific validity, or an unprofessional presentation. If the editor believes the article may be of interest to our readers, it is then sent out for external peer review.
- Length of Review Process: The publication process of the accepted work lasts 2-8 months from the date of receipt.
- Plagiarism Policy: Plagiarism is defined to present a portion or all the work of others as their own. Duplication or self-plagiarism is the reuse of a portion or all of the work in another article without citing the original work. ULUM uses the iThenticate software to detect instances of overlapping and similar text in submitted manuscripts. Wherever you see the “CrossCheck Deposited” or “CrossCheck Depositor” logos, you can be reassured that the publisher whose content you are reading is committed to actively combating plagiarism and publishing original research.
- Technical Evaluation and Plagiarism Screening: The study is reviewed by the editor for compliance with the journal publication principles, academic writing rules, and the ISNAD Citation Style and it is scanned about plagiarism by using iThenticate program. Placenta similarity rate to be less than %15 condition required. This review is completed in a maximum of 10 days. iThenticate is the leading provider of professional plagiarism detection and prevention technology used worldwide by scholarly publishers and research institutions to ensure the originality of written work before publication. iThenticate helps editors, authors and researchers prevent misconduct by comparing manuscripts against its database of over 50 billion web pages and 130 million content items, including 40 million works from 590 scholarly publisher participants of CrossCheck, a service offered by CrossRef and powered by iThenticate software. iThenticate is developed by Turnitin, the leader in plagiarism and originality checking for educational institutions worldwide. A manuscript may be rejected as unsuitable for publication if it does not meet the general guidelines for an ULUM article or if it is not of high enough quality as determined by the editors.
- Section Editor Review: The study which was carried out Preliminary Examination and Plagiarism Screening are examined by the related section editor in terms of problematic and academic language-style. This review is completed in a maximum of 15 days.
- Referee Process (Academic Evaluation): The study, which is subjected to review by the section editor, is submitted to the evaluation of at least two referees who has a doctoral thesis, book or article. The arbitration process is carried out confidentially within the framework of Double-blind peer review (* Double-blind peer review: Reviewers are unaware of the identity of the authors, and authors are also unaware of the identity of reviewers). Referee names are kept strictly confidential. Referee identities may only be disclosed to journal Editorial Board members, who are also instructed to maintain confidentiality). The referee is required to present his / her opinion about the reviewed study either on the text or to justify it with an explanation of at least 150 words on the online referee form. The author is given the right to defend his / her objections and opinions if he/she does not agree with the opinion of the referee. The field editor provides mutual communication between the author and the referee while maintaining confidentiality. The arbitration process is completed within a maximum of 30 (20 + 10) days. If both of the referee reports are positive, the study is submitted to the Editorial Board with a proposal for the evaluation of its publication. In case one of the two judges declares a negative opinion, the study is sent to a third referee. The studies can be published at least two positive decisions. Translated articles are sent to language and related field experts to assess the appropriateness of the original, the proper use of space concepts and language. The translation which the experts’ stated negative opinions are not published. The publication of book and symposium reviews and dissertation abstracts is decided as a result of the evaluation of the related field editors.
- Correction Phase: In the case of referees requesting proofreading in the text that they are examining, relevant reports are sent to the author and they are asked to correct them. The correction is requested to be completed within 10 days. The author presents his corrections by specifying a red color to the section editor.
- Section Editor Control: The field editor checks whether the author makes the corrections requested in the text. The inspection process is completed within a maximum of 5 days.
- Referee Control: The referee who requests correction checks whether the author has made any corrections requested from him in the text. The inspection process is completed within a maximum of 7 days.
- Preparing Extended Summary: At least 750 words Turkish and English Extended Summary have requested from the author who their works approved as can be published by the referee. The inspection process is completed within a maximum of 7 days.
- Language Control: The works which are passed through the referees and which have a minimum of 750 words in its own language and English extended summary are examined by Language Editors and if necessary the author is asked for a correction. The inspection process is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
- Editorial Board Review: The works which are passed through technical, academic and linguistic examination, final broadcast status is decided with the review of Editorial Board. In case of objection from the members, the Board shall decide by majority vote.
- Typesetting and Layout: The works which decided to be published by the Editorial Board, are made ready for publication by making typesetting and layout of the works.
- Data Transmission to National and International Indexes: The printed copies of the published issue shall be submitted to local and external reference libraries within 60 days at the latest; article metadata is transmitted to related Indexes within 15 days.
Referee Process
SEE, ARTICLE PRELIMINARY REVIEW FORM
SEE, TRANSLATION EVALUATION FORM
SEE, CODE OF CONDUCT AND BEST PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR JOURNAL EDITORS
